Legal Opinion

Southern Pacific Co. v. Proebstel

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1944No. Civil No. 4574PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FAIRES, Superior Judge.

Appellant, Southern Pacific Company, hereinafter called defendant, appeals from a money judgment rendered against it in the Superior Court of Yuma County in favor of appellee, Clotilda Proebstel, hereinafter called plaintiff, for land and crop damages caused by a flood in what is known as Coyote Wash during August of 1941. The action was tried before a jury and at the close of evidence defendant moved for an instructed verdict in its favor, which motion was denied, and thereafter the jury returned its verdict for the plaintiff. Following the entry of judgment for…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. San Gabriel Valley Country Club v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Lamb v. Reclamation District No. 108California Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Maricopa County Municipal Water Conservation District Number One v. Southwest Cotton Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Lebrun v. RichardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Los Angeles Cemetery Ass'n v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. City of Tucson v. KoerberArizona Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Maricopa County Municipal Water Conservation Dist. No. 1 v. WarfordArizona Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Gillespie Land and Irrigation Company v. GonzalezArizona Supreme Court · 1963
  4. England v. Ally Ong HingArizona Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Schlecht v. SchielArizona Supreme Court · 1953

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API