Legal Opinion

MacKay v. Breeze

Utah Supreme Court

Decided March 28, 1928No. 4568PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHansen, J.

In this cause the plaintiff secured a money judgment against the defendants on account of damages to plaintiff’s premises caused by seepage water, and the defendants were enjoined from coursing water through an irrigation ditch unless they either lined the same with cement or constructed a water-tight flume or conduit along the course of the ditch. Defendants appeal.

At the time this action was begun and tried, plaintiff was the owner of 2% acres of land located in the southwest quarter of section 34, township 1 south, range 1 west, Salt Lake meridian, in Salt Lake county, Utah. Plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Howell v. Big Horn Basin Colonization Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1905
  2. North Point Consolidated Irrigation Co. v. Utah & Salt Lake Canal Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Reed v. . the StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
  4. Jensen v. Davis & Weber Counties Canal Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Lisonbee v. Monroe Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1899

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Zampos v. United States Smelting, Refining and Mining Co. Anderson v. United States Smelting, Refining and Mining CoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1953
  2. State Ex Rel. Public Institutional Building Authority v. GriffithOhio Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Johnson Et Ux. v. BrinkerhoffUtah Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Patterson v. Horsefly Irrigation DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Stephenson v. Pioneer Irrigation DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1930

8 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