In the 1938 case of Chesebro v. Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the plaintiff, Mrs. Chesebro, sued for damages after her property was flooded due to a storm drain system failure caused by heavy rainfall. The defendant argued that they were not liable as it was an act of God and beyond their control. However, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mrs. Chesebro stating that although the rain itself could be considered an act of God, its effects were exacerbated by man-made structures which failed to function properly during this event - specifically referring to the flood control district's drainage system which had been designed inadequately and without proper maintenance or inspection procedures in place leading up to this incident causing damage on private properties like Mrs.Chesebro's land.

In the dissenting opinion for Chesebro v. Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Justice Black argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling denying damages to landowners affected by flood control activities was unjust. He contended that while public entities have a right to engage in projects for the common good, they must also bear responsibility when those actions cause harm or damage private property. In this case, he believed that evidence clearly showed the defendants' construction and maintenance of a storm drain system directly resulted in flooding and subsequent damage to plaintiffs' properties. Therefore, according to him, it was only fair and just under constitutional principles of due process and equal protection for these landowners be compensated accordingly by those responsible - namely Los Angeles County Flood Control District et al., regardless of their status as public bodies.