Anderson v. Rucker Bros.
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Snohomish county, Pemberton, J., entered September 27, 1917, upon the verdict of a jury rendered in favor of the defendant, in an action in tort.
1Opinion of the CourtBridges, J.
Suit for damages caused by overflow. The respondent was engaged in the logging and lumbering business. To assist it in its operations, a number of years prior to March, 1916, it built a dam near its works for the purpose of creating a backwater pond. In order to do this it dug a ditch from Lake Hanson creek to Worthy creek, in Snohomish county, and dug another ditch from Worthy creek to its dam. The purpose of these ditches was to divert a part or all of the water of these two creeks to its dam for the purpose of creating the pond. The pond thus created covered from five to fifteen acres of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. PomeroyTexas Supreme Court · 1887
- Savage v. SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
- Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. RameyIllinois Supreme Court · 1891
- Avery v. Vermont Electric Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1903
- Columbus & Western Railway Co. v. BridgesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Bodin v. City of StanwoodWashington Supreme Court · 1996
- Ferderer v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1950
- Colón v. Shell Co.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1939
- Patterson v. Horsefly Irrigation DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 1937
- Dye v. BurdickSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1977
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.