Sinai v. Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Railway Co.
Mississippi Supreme Court
From tbe circuit court of Sharkey county. Hon. John D. Q-illand, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion. The question is not whether our courts will adopt the doctrine of the civil law as to surface waters, but whether a corporation will be permitted to enter upon and destroy a valuable plantation, or a number of them, with impunity, when it might enjoy its own property to the same extent without injury to others, and when due care and skill in the construction of its…
Read the full summary
From tbe circuit court of Sharkey county. Hon. John D. Q-illand, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion. The question is not whether our courts will adopt the doctrine of the civil law as to surface waters, but whether a corporation will be permitted to enter upon and destroy a valuable plantation, or a number of them, with impunity, when it might enjoy its own property to the same extent without injury to others, and when due care and skill in the construction of its road-bed would avoid this injury and impose no additional expense on the company. The declaration alleges that a trestle…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, J.
The cause of action of appellant is stated as follows, in-substance, in the'declaration: That Sinai was the owner and in possession of a valuable plantation in section 21, township 13, range 7, in Issaquena county, in this state, worth the sum of $20,000; that the plantation was in what is commonly known as the “Yazoo and Mississippi Delta,” where the lands are almost level, and the channels of the streams shallow and the flow of their waters sluggish, and the beds incapable of containing their contents in rainy seasons ; that the lands said to have been damaged in-this suit, lie between Deer…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Livingston v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
- Gillham v. Madison County RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
- Shane v. Kansas City, St. Joseph & Council Bluffs RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Waterman v. Connecticut & Passumpsic Rivers RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
- Trustees of the Wabash & Erie Canal v. SpearsIndiana Supreme Court · 1861
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. GrovesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Welder v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1917
- Kansas City, Memphis & Birmingham Railroad v. SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 1895
- Fordham v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1904
- Holman v. RichardsonMississippi Supreme Court · 1917
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.