Richards v. Dower
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Nevada County. The action was brought to enjoin the defendant from constructing a tunnel through a lot owned by the plaintiff in the city of Nevada. The construction of the tunnel was in progress at the commencement of the action, and extended about fifteen feet into the lot. It was twenty feet below the surface, and would pass when completed one hundred and fifty feet through the lot.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Nevada County. The action was brought to enjoin the defendant from constructing a tunnel through a lot owned by the plaintiff in the city of Nevada. The construction of the tunnel was in progress at the commencement of the action, and extended about fifteen feet into the lot. It was twenty feet below the surface, and would pass when completed one hundred and fifty feet through the lot. The dimensions of the tunnel do not appear, but the court finds that it was being constructed for the purpose of working and developing a quartz ledge, and…
1Opinion of the CourtSharpstein, J.
The court found, that at the time of the commencement of this action, the defendant .had excavated and projected a tunnel under the lot of the plaintiff, a distance of fifteen feet, and was engaged in the further extension thereof, and threatened to continue the same, but that said tunnel has not affected, and will not, if completed, affect injuriously or otherwise the surface ground of plaintiff’s said lot. There is a further finding, “ that the driving of the tunnel was not and *63will not, if completed, cause the plaintiff irreparable injury or injure said lot in any way.” And another, “that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Williams v. . the New-York Central Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Hicks v. MichaelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- People ex rel. Pierce v. MorrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Merced Mining Co. v. FremontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- More v. MassiniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Learned v. CastleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Art Movers, Inc. v. Ni West, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1992
- California Development Co. v. New Liverpool Salt Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1909
- Crescent Mining Co. v. Silver King Mining Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1898
- DVD Copy Control Assn., Inc. v. Kaleidescape, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2009
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.