Legal Opinion

Stock v. City of Hillsdale

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1909No. Docket No. 42PublishedCited by 18 opinions

Appeal from Hillsdale; Lockwood, J., presiding. Bill by Frederick W. Stock against the city of Hillsdale to enjoin the diversion of certain water. From a decree dismissing the bill, complainant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

The bill in this case is filed to obtain an injunction restraining the defendant from increasing the capacity of its water plant or from laying any more pipe into Bawbeese Laxe and connecting the same with said water plant, and thus diverting the water from the water of the St. Joseph river to the damage of the complainant as a lower riparian owner. The bill alleges: That the complainant is, and for many years has been, the owner of the water power of the St. Joseph river at the city of Hillsdale, and also of the water power at Litchfield in the county of Hillsdale; that he has expended many…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. City of Logansport v. UhlIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Edwards v. Allouez Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1878
  3. Blake v. CornwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Fisk v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
  5. Allen v. Thornapple Electric Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1906

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation v. Nestlé Waters North America IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006
  2. McMorran Milling Co. v. Pere Marquette Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Koontz v. Bay Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  4. City of Benton Harbor v. Michigan Fuel & Light Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Beaverton Power Co. v. Wolverine Power Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1929

13 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