Hayden v. Consolidated Mining & Dredging Co.
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Respondent was the owner of a tract of farming land in Siskiyou county, appurtenant to which was a ditch known as the "Alger Ditch," used for conveying water from Scott river to and upon said land for purposes of irrigation. The defendant constructed a dam in the channel of the river near the head of this ditch, thereby causing the waters of the stream to flow against one of its banks and into the head of the ditch. As a result, about one-half mile of the ditch was washed away, necessitating the construction of a flume for this entire distance. This action was brought to recover $5,000…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Sappenfield v. Main Street & Agricultural Park RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Stephenson v. S. Pac. Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
- People v. BruggyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Isaac & Rebecca Thomas v. GatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- People v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Barsha v. Metro-Goldwyn-MayerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Buttrick v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1927
- First Nat. Bank of Wetumka v. NolenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Bieser v. DaviesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Gregoriev v. Northwestern Pacific RailroadCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.