Clark v. Di Prima
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
Appellants and respondent own contiguous farmland with 1,320 feet of common boundary. Respondent’s property slopes toward appellants’ at a gradient of 1 foot to 100 feet, but there is a ridge or dike along the common boundary approximately 6 feet wide, of varying height. Respondent irrigated his land by flooding, obtaining water from a Merced Irrigation District ditch. Appellants’ adjoining land was planted to almond trees, which were irrigated by a sprinkler system.
According tp the settled statement on appeal, when appellant David Clark discovered some of his almond trees flooded about 9…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Oettinger v. StewartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Green v. General Petroleum Corp.California Supreme Court · 1928
- Robinson v. CableCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- Luthringer v. MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Parker v. LarsenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Lemons v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- United States v. Southern California Edison Co.District Court, E.D. California · 2004
- Pierce v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Court of Appeal · 1985
- Diamond Springs Lime Co. v. American River ConstructorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
- Halliday v. GreeneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.