Legal Opinion

Hoffman v. Tuolumne Cty. Water Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1858PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, County of Tuolumne. This was an action, brought by E. Hoffman, C. Catch, K. Kuas, H. Helderf, F. Brown, and C. Verbo of, copartners in the business of mining, against the defendants, who were an incorporated company, to recover damages for the breaking of defendants’ dam and flooding the plaintiffs’ mining-claim.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, County of Tuolumne. This was an action, brought by E. Hoffman, C. Catch, K. Kuas, H. Helderf, F. Brown, and C. Verbo of, copartners in the business of mining, against the defendants, who were an incorporated company, to recover damages for the breaking of defendants’ dam and flooding the plaintiffs’ mining-claim. The plaintiffs’ complaint contains one count, and is in substance as follows: On the 12th day of July, a. d. 1857, plaintiffs were and still are the owners of a valuable mining-claim, situated, etc., upon which they had…

1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.

Terry, C. J., and Field, J., concurring.

At the first presentation of the questions on the demurrer to the complaint, we were inclined to think it well taken; but on reflection, we think that it is not. The complaint is for negligence, by defendants insufficiently building a dam across a watercourse, or carelessness and mismanagement on the part of the defendants, whereby the dam broke and injured the mining-claims of plaintiffs below. It will be seen that the gravamen of the action is not for building the dam. That they had a right to do, and it seems to be conceded that, if the work had been…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Henschel v. MahlerCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1846

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Smith v. WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Southern Pac. Co. v. HetzerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
  3. Sutliff v. Sweetwater Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Stapp v. Madera Canal & Irrigation Co.California Court of Appeal · 1917
  5. Central, Trust Co. v. Wabash, St. L. & P. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1893

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API