Legal Opinion

Montgomery v. Locke

California Supreme Court

Decided August 30, 1886No. 9740PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SEARLS, C.

This is an action to recover damages for injury to the land of the plaintiff by construction of levees, which are claimed to have obstructed the natural flow of water, and for a judgment that the levees, dams and embankments of defendants be abated as a nuisance. Plaintiff had a verdict as follows: “We, the jury in the above-entitled cause, find for the plaintiff in the sum of fifteen hundred ($1,500) dollars, caused by the repair and maintenance of levee No. one (1) by the defendants.” Plaintiff thereupon waived all right *694to a decree abating the nuisance complained of, and judgment…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Shepard v. PrattSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. O'Connell v. East Tenn., Va. & Ga. Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1891
  2. Montgomery v. LockeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Nokken v. Avery Manufacturing Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1903

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API