Corcoran v. Rotheimer

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the Arizona Canal should be treated as a natural watercourse and landowners could not recover damages for negligence, trespass, inverse condemnation, and strict liability claims stemming from the choice of location near the Arizona Canal
• question is whether the artificial body of water “has developed the characteristics of a natural watercourse”
• no strict liability for waters escaping from natural water course
• no strict liability for waters escaping from natural water course

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).