Gloster v. Wade
California Supreme Court
Appeal from, a judgment of the Superior Court of Modoc County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Foote, C.
According to the allegations of the complaint in this action, Wade had torn down the fence on the land of Gloster, which the latter had replaced, and .the former was threatening again to tear it down at a *408certain point, and travel across the plaintiff’s land, in violation of his rights and to his damage. An injunction restraining the defendant from doing the injuries threatened, and for the recovery of damages for the alleged trespass already committed, were prayed for.
The defendant denied all the material allegations of the complaint, and set up by way of justification and de- '…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bolger v. FossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by8 opinions
- McRose v. BottyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Huffman v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Cooper v. Monterey CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Southern Pacific Co. v. City of PomonaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Sutton v. NicolaisenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.