United States v. Adolph G. Sutro, Adolph G. Sutro, Cross-Appellant v. United States of America, Cross-Appellee

Good Law
235 F.2d 499·1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 3895
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 7, 195614588_1California2,005 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fee, J.

In 1946, Sutro bought certain farm lands riparian to Pilgrim Creek. Before that time, the government had constructed a sewage disposal plant for Camp Pendleton, the effluents of which were deposited in the stream until 1952. Pilgrim Creek became so polluted that it was not fit for the irrigation of lands used for growing of vegetables intended for human consumption.

The cause was tried by a court without a jury under the Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1346 (b), 2671-2680. It was found that the employees of the government were negligent in operating the sewage disposal plant, as a result of which' the waters of the stream became polluted. The District Court found $18,918.36 represented loss of rental value to Sutro, while $13,003.03 was awarded as damages for increased building costs.

Appeal was filed by the government on the ground that there should have been no award for the increased costs of building contemplated facilities. Sutro cross-appeals (1) because damages were not allowed for increased cost of erecting a residence and guest house, including sewerage, fencing, grading and incidentals, and for the increased expense of the irrigation system, machinery and equipment for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.