Tormey v. Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.
This action was brought to restrain the defendant from permitting seepage water from its canal to flow upon the lands of plaintiffs and for damages caused by such water. Judgment was rendered in favor of the defendant and the plaintiffs appeal. The plaintiffs allege: “That said ditch or canal was negligently and carelessly constructed by defendant, and that because of such construction by defendant water has constantly escaped and seeped through the bottom and banks of said canal, and said defendant, ever since the use by it of said canal or ditch for conducting water has negligently,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Eachus v. Los Angeles Consolidated Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
- Reardon v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Bradbury v. Vandalia Levee & Drainage DistrictIllinois Supreme Court · 1908
- Southern Pac. R.R. v. DufourCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Auerbach v. HealyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Albers v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
- Bauer v. County of VenturaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Holtz v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
- Powers Farms, Inc. v. Consolidated Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Johndrow v. ThomasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.