Hohenshell v. South Riverside Land & Water Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, C.
Judgment was rendered in the lower court against the defendant, requiring it to abate (to a depth of two and seven-tenths feet from the top) a dam placed by it in the outlet of Elsinore lake, in Riverside county, whereby plaintiff’s land was overflowed; and enjoining it from maintaining in said outlet that or any other obstruction.
The appeal is on the judgment-roll; and the points of error assigned are: 1. That the theory of the complaint is at variance with the case as made by the findings; 2. That the findings are defective in failing to show the extent of the plaintiff’s right;…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kidder v. StevensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
3Cited by7 opinions
- Western Aggregates, Inc. v. County of YubaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Jennings v. JordanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
- Keeler v. HakyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- William C. Hoyt, Jr. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1961
- Klumpke v. HenleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.