Legal Opinion

Burgett v. Calentine

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided March 20, 1952No. 5168PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LUJAN, Chief Justice.

This is an action for damages in tort and for an injunction to restrain the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment of an easement. The case was tried to the court without a jury and it found in favor of the plaintiffs. From the judgment which followed, the defendant prosecutes this appeal. The parties will be referred to as they appeared in the lower court.

In 1884, James Hunter, the predecessor in title of the plaintiffs, settled oh public land adjoining the quarter section on which certain springs are located. While the land was still a part of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. De Necochea v. CurtisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Howard v. PerrinArizona Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Howard v. PerrinSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  4. Vanderwork v. HewesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Williams v. HarterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Greene v. EsquibelNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Walker v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
  3. Trigg v. AllemandNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. Herbertson v. IliffNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. Matthews v. StateNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1991

8 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