McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.

California Supreme Court

McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.

45 P.2d 816, 3 Cal. 2d 765, 1935 Cal. LEXIS 486

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedMay 29, 1935

DocketSac. No. 4711

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 45 P.2d 816 (McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp., 45 P.2d 816, 3 Cal. 2d 765, 1935 Cal. LEXIS 486 (Cal. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

CURTIS, J.

This action is referred to in the opinion this day filed in the ease of McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp. (Sac. No. 4765), ante, p. 704 [45 Pac. (2d) 807], and is a companion case to the Anna McArthur case. Respondent’s lands front on Pittville Pool and are located on the same side of said pool as the Anna McArthur lands, and between the two parcels of Anna McArthur lands involved in her said action against the appellant herein. The same factual situation exists in this case as was presented in the Anna McArthur case. For this reason the decision in this case must be the same as that rendered and filed in the Anna McArthur case. Upon-the authority of that case the judgment in the present action is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial on the issue of damages alone, in accordance with the views expressed in [766]*766the opinion this day filed in the case of McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp., Sac. No. 4765. Each party to pay his own costs.

Shenk, J., Waste, C. J., Thompson, J.. Spence, J., pro tem., and Nourse, J., pro tem., concurred.

Rehearing denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CURTIS, J.

This action is referred to in the opinion this day filed in the ease of McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp. (Sac. No. 4765), ante, p. 704 [45 Pac. (2d) 807], and is a companion case to the Anna McArthur case. Respondent’s lands front on Pittville Pool and are located on the same side of said pool as the Anna McArthur lands, and between the two parcels of Anna McArthur lands involved in her said action against the appellant herein. The same factual situation exists in this case as was presented in the Anna McArthur case. For this reason the decision in this case must be the same as that rendered and filed in the Anna McArthur case. Upon-the authority of that case the judgment in the present action is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial on the issue of damages alone, in accordance with the views expressed in [766]*766the opinion this day filed in the case of McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp., Sac. No. 4765. Each party to pay his own costs.

Shenk, J., Waste, C. J., Thompson, J.. Spence, J., pro tem., and Nourse, J., pro tem., concurred.

Rehearing denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 P.2d 816, 3 Cal. 2d 765, 1935 Cal. LEXIS 486, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcarthur-v-mt-shasta-power-corp-cal-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack