Grandona v. Lovdal
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Belcher C. C.
— This action was brought to abate a nuisance, and for damages. The case was tried by the court, and judgment given for defendant, from which, and from an order denying a new trial, plaintiff has appealed.
The plaintiff owns a tract of land in Sacramento *613County, containing about fifteen and one half acres, and the alleged nuisance is a line of cottonwood trees, standing about eight feet apart, along his southern boundary, for a distance of about 534 feet. The defendant owns the adjoining land, and the trees were planted by his grantor in 1865 from eight to twelve inches south of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ball v. NyeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Grandona v. LovdalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Commonwealth v. BlaisdellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Meyer v. MetzlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by13 opinions
- Michalson v. NuttingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
- Hinman v. Pacific Air TransportCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Lussier v. San Lorenzo Valley Water DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Sterling v. WeinsteinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1950
- Stevens v. MoonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.