Helm v. McClure
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Mendocino County and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Britt, C.
— Action begun May 13, 1893, to abate an alleged public nuisance, plaintiff claiming to have sustained special damage. After trial the court found that *201for fifteen years last past there has been a public road in the county of Lake, about forty-three rods in length, which is an extension northeasterly of Main street in the town of Upper Lake; that for upwards of three years last past plaintiff has been the owner and in possession of a lot of land on the west side of, and adjacent to, said public road; that the only means of entrance and exit to and from plaintiff's lot is over such…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Harding & Loftin v. JasperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- People v. County of MarinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- City of Chicago v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1894
- Smith v. City of San Luis ObispoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- City of San Francisco v. CalderwoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Union Transportation Co. v. Sacramento CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- People v. SayigCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- City of Venice v. Short Line Beach Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
- Bartholomew v. StaheliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- City of Los Angeles v. McCollumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.