Drinkhouse v. Spring Valley Water Works
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco changing the place of trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.
This is a suit to enjoin the defendant from building a dam, which plaintiff alleges defendant has commenced and is now constructing, and asserts its intention of completing, and which, it is alleged, will, when completed, permanently flood a certain tract of land in San Mateo County in which plaintiff has a leasehold estate.
The action was commenced in San Francisco, and in due time the defendant moved to transfer the cause for trial to the county of San Mateo, on the ground that the proper place for the trial thereof was in the county in which the real property subject to the threatened…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Glines v. MattaSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1913
- People v. Selby Smelting and Lead Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Drainage Dist. 7 of Poinsett County v. HutchinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Cox v. Railway Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
- Last Chance Water Ditch Co. v. Emigrant Ditch Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.