Legal Opinion

Anderson v. Pacific Avenue Investment Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 13, 1962No. Civ. 10226PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchottky, J.

Certain property owners in a subdivision in the City of Stockton brought this action against the Pacific Avenue Investment Company, Inc., owners of a building housing a bowling alley, and the operators of the bowling alley to prohibit the defendants from operating the business and to compel the removal of the building housing the bowling alley from the land. Appellants also sought damages for an alleged nuisance and sought to establish an easement over the property of defendant Pacific Avenue Investment Company. Other property owners were permitted to intervene as plaintiffs. Judgment was in…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Werner v. GrahamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Wing v. Forest Lawn Cemetery Assn.California Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Hannula v. Hacienda Homes, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1949
  4. McBride v. FreemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Martin v. HolmCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Citizens for Covenant Compliance v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Smith v. NorthCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  3. Ross v. HarootunianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  4. Heinly v. LolliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  5. Citizens for Covenant Compliance v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API