From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fisher v. Baldwin

The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One
Oct 2, 1978
21 Wn. App. 1001 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978)

Summary

In Baldwin v. Fisher, 110 Minn. 186, 124 N.W. 1094, it was held that the maintaining of a ditch for the statutory period gave a prescriptive right to the continuance of the watercourse as deepened and improved.

Summary of this case from Naporra v. Weckwerth

Opinion

No. 5891-1.

October 2, 1978. UNREPORTED OPINION

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 783278, Stanley C. Soderland, J., entered July 26, 1977.


Affirmed by unpublished opinion per Williams, J., concurred in by Dore and Ringold, JJ.


Summaries of

Fisher v. Baldwin

The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One
Oct 2, 1978
21 Wn. App. 1001 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978)

In Baldwin v. Fisher, 110 Minn. 186, 124 N.W. 1094, it was held that the maintaining of a ditch for the statutory period gave a prescriptive right to the continuance of the watercourse as deepened and improved.

Summary of this case from Naporra v. Weckwerth
Case details for

Fisher v. Baldwin

Case Details

Full title:BOB FISHER, Respondent, v. GARRETT BALDWIN, ET AL, Appellants

Court:The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One

Date published: Oct 2, 1978

Citations

21 Wn. App. 1001 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978)
21 Wash. App. 1001

Citing Cases

Naporra v. Weckwerth

Mueller v. Fruen, 36 Minn. 273, 30 N.W. 886; Schulenberg v. Zimmerman, 86 Minn. 70, 90 N.W. 156. In Baldwin…

Herrmann v. Larson

There are cases to the effect that when pursuant to a verbal contract the owners of adjoining tracts of land…