Legal Opinion
Curci v. Palo Verde Irrigation District
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 13, 1945No. Civ. 3284PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMarks, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered after sustaining a general demurrer to a second amended complaint with leave to amend. Plaintiff failed to amend his pleading and has prosecuted this appeal.
The action is for damages resulting from water escaping from defendant’s ditch and flooding forty acres of land planted to lettuce.
Defendant is a public corporation organized for the purpose, among others, of distributing water for public use through canals and ditches. (Stats. 1923, p. 1067; Deering’s Gen. Laws, Act 3880.) Plaintiff was the lessee of the land in question and the owner of the…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- United States v. SponenbargerSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Reardon v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- House v. Los Angeles County Flood Control DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Powers Farms, Inc. v. Consolidated Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Silvers v. GrossmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Stone v. Los Angeles County Flood Control DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Weck v. Los Angeles County Flood Control DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Hayashi v. Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Vaughn v. Certified Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Hiemstra v. HustonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.