Legal Opinion
Woolliscroft v. Starr
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 17, 1964No. Civ. 7210PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINLEY, J. pro tem. *
At the close of plaintiff’s case, before the court without a jury, defendant moved for judgment pursuant to section 631.8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The motion was granted and judgment entered in favor of defendants. The plaintiff appeals from this judgment.
Plaintiff and defendants are owners of adjoining tracts of land in San Diego County. A natural watercourse runs through these properties. The channel is dry except when it rains or during the wet season. On defendants’ property, which lies downstream from that of plaintiff, a dam was constructed across the stream…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Estate of Bristol v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Berniker v. BernikerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Key v. McCabeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- Formosa Corp. v. RogersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- White v. WalshCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Newby v. Alto Riviera ApartmentsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Charles C. Chapman Building Co. v. California MartCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- Greening v. General Air-Conditioning Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1965
- Columbia Engineering Co. v. JoinerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Heap v. General Motors Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1977
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.