Kripp v. Curtis
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Yolo County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Searls, C.
This is an action to recover damages for the obstruction of a private road, and to remove and abate such obstructions as a private nuisance.
Plaintiff had judgment abating the nuisance, and for damages in the sum of fifty dollars, from which, and from an order denying a new trial, the defendants appeal.
It is conceded that plaintiff has been the owner of the land described in his complaint since March 29, 1865, and that his title thereto came from one J. S. Curtis, who is also the grantor of defendants, by conveyances subsequently executed ; that there was a public road running…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Smyles v. . HastingsNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Holmes v. SeelyNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Sherman v. BuickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Lansing v. WiswallNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Gidney v. EarlNew York Supreme Court · 1834
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Duff v. MatthewsTexas Supreme Court · 1958
- O'BANION v. BorbaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Waubun Beach Ass'n v. WilsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
- Cheda v. BodkinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Ballard v. TitusCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.