Legal Opinion

Locklin v. City of Lafayette

California Supreme Court

Decided February 28, 1994No. S030595PublishedCited by 65 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*337Opinion

BAXTER, J.

Is a public entity liable in tort or inverse condemnation for damage to downstream riparian property caused by the discharge of surface waters into a natural watercourse abutting its property? The Court of Appeal held that there could be no liability.

We granted the petition of plaintiffs, owners of damaged properties, to consider whether the “natural watercourse rule” stated in Archer v. City of Los Angeles (1941) 19 Cal.2d 19 [119 P.2d 1] (Archer), by which the Court of Appeal believed itself bound, was properly applied in this case, and to decide whether article I, section…

2Cases cited52 opinions

  1. Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Albers v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Archer v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Gray v. Reclamation District No. 1500California Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. Hensler v. City of GlendaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Paterno v. StateCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  3. Katzberg v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Rossi v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. Continental Development Corp.California Supreme Court · 1997

60 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