Legal Opinion

Hitchcock v. Lovelace

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 19, 1941No. Civ. 2491PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WEST, J. pro tem.

This is an appeal by the sole appearing defendant Kathleen McN. Lovelace, on the judgment roll, from a judgment decreeing that plaintiffs are the owners of certain easements, rights of way, and rights in, to and over lands of appellant lying adjacent to property of plaintiffs in San Bernardino County and enjoining defendants, their agents, servants or employees from interfering with plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment thereof.

The complaint contains several causes of action although the same are riot separately stated.

Five separate easements were contended for and decreed by the…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Clarke v. ClarkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Cooley v. Miller & LuxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Crockett Land & Cattle Co.California Court of Appeal · 1924
  4. Lobb v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Barlow v. FrinkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Western Aggregates, Inc. v. County of YubaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  2. Alabama Power Co. v. RaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1954
  3. Gschwend v. StollCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  4. Tucker v. WatkinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  5. Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District v. ZinzerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942

1 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