Legal Opinion

Keifer v. Stanley

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 22, 1924No. 22676PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGood, J.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover damages to his land and crops, caused, as he avers, by the wrongful act of defendant in damming and obstructing the flow of water in the natural channel of Oak creek in such a manner as tc divert and cast the waters of the creek upon ^aintiff’s lands.

Defendant in his answer denied all the allegations of the petition save those relating to the ownership of the farms of the respective parties, and for a further defense alleged that “if plaintiff’s lands were flooded, or his lands or crops damaged, such flooding and damage were caused without any fault,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Wallenburg v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Kane v. BowdenNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Taylor v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Nelson v. WirtheleNebraska Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Suiter v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1909

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Snyder v. Platte Valley Public Power & Irrigation DistrictNebraska Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Leaders v. Sarpy CountyNebraska Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Courter v. MaloleyNebraska Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Andersen v. Town of MapleNebraska Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Born v. KeilNebraska Supreme Court · 1946

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API