Rupp

Rupp v. Hiveley

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 594·94 Cal. App. 667·271 P. 768
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 5, 1928Docket No. 3586.California2,351 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hart, J.

By their complaint herein the plaintiffs seek an injunction to prevent the defendant from doing or threatening to do certain acts, the nature of which will presently be explained. A demurrer to the complaint on the ground of the want of sufficient facts was sustained and the plaintiffs were allowed ten days within which to amend their pleading. The plaintiffs refused or failed to amend within the time allowed, and thereupon the court rendered judgment dismissing the complaint and dissolving the temporary injunction or restraining order applied for and granted upon the filing of the complaint.

This appeal is from said judgment.

The complaint alleges that the plaintiffs are the respective owners in severalty of two ten-acre tracts of land lying and fronting on the west line of Agate or Ramona Avenue, in San Bernardino County; that the defendant is the owner of a tract of land lying and fronting on the east line of said avenue; “that for more than twenty-five years prior to the date of this suit, there have been planted and growing along the east line of said Agate or Ramona Avenue, a large number of Eucalyptus trees; that said trees are located on the said Agate or Ramona Avenue…

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.