Paolini v. Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co.
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno-County rendered upon an order directing a verdict for the defendant. Geo. E. Church, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
Action for damages. The jury, under instruction of the court and upon motion of defendant, at the conclusion of plaintiff’s evidence, rendered a verdict for defendant. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment upon the verdict.
Plaintiff alleged ownership of certain one hundred and sixty acres of land, along the eastern boundary of which defendant was the owner of an irrigating ditch used for the-purpose of storing and conveying water; that defendant had failed and neglected to keep said ditch in repair, by reason of which said failure and neglect “the same has become unfit for the purpose of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Estate of Morey v. WellsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Parker v. LarsenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Chidester v. Consolidated Ditch Co.California Supreme Court · 1881
- Shields v. Orr Extension Ditch Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1897
- Powell v. Nevada, California & Oregon RailwayNevada Supreme Court · 1905
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Stephenson v. Pioneer Irrigation DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1930
- Kall v. CarruthersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- Albrethson v. Carey Valley Reservoir Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1947
- Butler-Veitch, Inc. v. BarnardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- Norton v. Ransome-Crummey Co.California Supreme Court · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.