The Weinberg Co. v. Bixby
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. H. C. Beach, Hunsaker, Britt & Edwards, Hunsaker, Britt & Cosgrove, Roy V. Reppy, Henry J. Stevens, O’Melveny, Millikin & Tuller and O’Melveny, Stevens & Millikin for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtSloane, J.
This appeal is from a verdict and judgment awarding damages for alleged wrongful diversion of the flood waters of the Los Angeles River upon plaintiff’s lands.
The Pacific Electric Company, a railway corporation, the Dominguez Estate Company, a private corporation, and George H. Bixby and Amelia M. Bixby, who are husband and wife, were joined as parties defendant.
The Pacific Electric Company was exonerated from liability by the jury, and verdict and judgment were against the other defendants, appellants here, as joint tort-feasors.
The defendant Dominguez Estate Company was the owner of farming…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- San Gabriel Valley Country Club v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Lamb v. Reclamation District No. 108California Supreme Court · 1887
- Los Angeles Cemetery Ass'n v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Horton v. GoodenoughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- McDaniel v. CummingsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Sindell v. Abbott LaboratoriesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
- Archer v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Clement v. State Reclamation BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Belair v. Riverside County Flood Control DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Alexander v. HammarbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.