Legal Opinion
City & County of San Francisco v. Union Pacific Railroad
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 9, 1996No. A068676PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PHELAN, J. *
This appeal concerns the ownership of an 80-foot-wide strip of land which the City and County of San Francisco (the City) has used as part of its Hetch-Hetchy underground aqueduct. The trial court determined that the City did not own the land in fee, but had acquired a subsurface easement in the land for its pipeline, and that defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company (Union Pacific) was the fee owner. The City appeals contending the trial court erred in interpreting the original deed and the judge abused his discretion in awarding Union Pacific attorney fees. We affirm the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Continental Baking Co. v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- People v. Ocean Shore Railroad, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1948
- City of Manhattan Beach v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- Medical Operations Management, Inc. v. National Health Laboratories, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1986
- Cathay Bank v. LeeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Exxess Electronixx v. Heger Realty Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1998
- City of Emeryville v. The Sherwin-Williams CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Turner v. SchultzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Lechuza Villas West v. California Coastal Com.California Court of Appeal · 1997
- County of Solano v. HandleryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.