Richardson v. City of Eureka

Good Law
110 Cal. 441·1895 Cal. LEXIS 1077·42 P. 965
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 16, 1895S. F. No. 75California1,410 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

This action, begun January 6, 1894, is a sequel of the case between the same parties reported in 96 Cal. 443 . In that case Richardson obtained a judgment, which was affirmed in this court, for damages accruing to him by reason of a nuisance consisting in the obstruction of a natural watercourse on his land, and caused by certain street improvements made under the direction of defendant. In this action plaintiff seeks to recover for damage caused by the alleged continued maintenance of the same nuisance, and an injunction to restrain the further continuance thereof. We are informed by the present record that in the said former action it was alleged by plaintiff, among other things, that he was the owner of a lot of land situated at the corner of Fourth and E streets in the city of Eureka, and of certain buildings thereon; that a natural waterway ran across said lot, by which a great quantity of surface water was collected, and that such water escaped through a culvert crossing said Fourth street in front of plaintiff’s property; that in grading said streets adjacent to plaintiff’s lot the defendant moved said culvert and negligently failed to replace the same with any means 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.