Belcher

Belcher v. Murphy

Good Law
1889 Cal. LEXIS 979·81 Cal. 39·22 P. 264
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 2, 1889No. 12985California622 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Works, J.

This is a proceeding by the respondent to enjoin the appellant from destroying a levee alleged to have been constructed by the respondent on a certain tract of land owned by her to protect a certain other tract of her land from overflow. There was atrial by the court, findings for plaintiff, and judgment accordingly. The appellant moved the court below for a nonsuit, which was denied. He also moved for a new trial, which was also denied, and he appeals. The motion for a nonsuit was “on the grounds of plaintiff’s failure to prove any of the material allegations of the complaint, and a failure to prove any damage done to the levee, or any notice to the defendant of the claim of the plaintiff to the levee prior to his purchase.” The evidence tended to show that one Taylor was the owner of property which he sold to the appellant, and that at the time of such sale he called to the attention of the appellant the fact that the respondent had with his, Taylor’s, consent constructed the levee in question on the line of and partly upon the lands then owned by Taylor, and that the appellant pur *41 chased his lands with full knowledge of the fact that such levee was constructed by the…

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.