Everett v. Hydraulic Flume Tunnel Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District, Butte County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the CourtCrocker, J.
This is an action to recover damages caused by the breaking of a dam owned by the defendants. The plaintiffs are the owners of mining claims and sluice-boxes below the defendants’ dam, which broke at a high stage of water, and, as is alleged, injured the plaintiffs’ property below. The case was tried by the Court, who found for the defendants, and the plaintiffs appeal. The Court found that the dam was “ well built, and constructed in a good and workmanlike manner, and of sufficient strength and capacity to contain the amount of water within it; ” that no negligence on the part of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hoffman v. Tuolumne Cty. Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by10 opinions
- Sutliff v. Sweetwater Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1920
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. Chicago, Lake Shore & South Bend Railway Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1910
- Central, Trust Co. v. Wabash, St. L. & P. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1893
- Curci v. Palo Verde Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- Hannaher v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba RailroadSupreme Court Of The Territory Of Dakota · 1888
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.