Learned v. Castle
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Joaquin County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinions rendered in Bank and in Department Two, and on the first appeal reported in 67 Cal. 41.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
On hearing in Bank.
This is an action for damages for an alleged nuisance, and for a mandatory injunction to prevent its continuance. The nuisance or nuisances charged consist in this: Northeast of plaintiffs’ lands there is a stream or slough called Stone Slough or Bear River, and between that stream and plaintiffs’ lands there are other (smaller) natural sloughs. Stone Slough and the other said sloughs run in a southwesterly direction. Stone Slough, at a point about three miles from plaintiffs’ lands, is tapped by a canal," constructed by defendant Christian and others, which carries its…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Richards v. DowerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Gilman v. CurtisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Kerns v. McKeanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Sloss v. AllmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Randall v. HunterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- De Burgh v. De BurghCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Estate of BairdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation Dist. v. Superior Court of Tulare Cty.California Supreme Court · 1920
- California Development Co. v. New Liverpool Salt Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1909
- Wood v. MoultonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.