Legal Opinion

Brown v. McAllister

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1870No. 2,026PublishedCited by 23 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth District, City and County of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtCrockett, J.

The plaintiff owns a- house and lot situate on Clay street, in the City of San Francisco, upon a declivity, and the defendant is the owner of the next adjoining lot above that of the plaintiff; whilst still higher up the hill, and adjoining the defendant’s premises, is a lot occupied by Chinamen and others. The action is to recover damages for an alleged nuisance, resulting, as averred in the complaint, from' the defective drainage of the defendant’s lot, and from the leak-, age and overflowing of his privy vault and cesspool, whereby foul and offensive water flows upon the premises of the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Pilot Rock Creek Canal Co. v. ChapmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Sappenfield v. Main Street & Agricultural Park RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Sloggy v. DilworthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
  3. Danks v. RodeheaverWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1885
  4. People v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
  5. Watson v. Colusa-Parrot Mining & Smelting Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1905

18 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