Legal Opinion

Meservy v. Idaho Irrigation Co.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided May 28, 1923PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FLYNN, Commissioner.

— In this action respondent seeks damages sustained by reason of the wilful failure and negligence of the appellant, a Carey Act construction company, to furnish him his pro rata share of its available water supply for irrigation during the 1919 season.

On application for change of venue, the case was transferred from Lincoln county to Blaine county. The appellant is the same defendant appearing in the ease of Tapper v. Idaho Irrigation Co., Ltd., 36 Ida. 78, 210 Pac. 591, and the various contracts involved and discussed in that ease are identical with the contracts herein…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kinzell v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Tapper v. Idaho Irrigation Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Preis v. Idaho Irrigation Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Edholm v. Idaho Irrigation Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1923

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Quillin v. ColquhounIdaho Supreme Court · 1926
  2. SPOKANE MERCHANTS'ASSOCIATION v. OlmsteadIdaho Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Beloit v. GreenIdaho Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Dempsey v. KiernanIdaho Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Preston v. Farmers Irrigation DistrictNebraska Supreme Court · 1940

1 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