Legal Opinion

Smith v. Cameron

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1927PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBelt, J.

In 1922, the plaintiff attempted, through the exercise of the power of eminent domain, to enlarge what is knoym as the “Farmers’ Ditch,” for the purpose of conveying water from the Little Applegate River to irrigate 160 acres of semi-arid land owned by him. An action was instituted, by virtue of Sections 5719 and 5720, Or. L., to appropriate a very narrow strip of land owned by defendants, in order to widen this ditch so as to carry additional water. A trial was had and judgment rendered in favor of the defendants, dismissing the action. Plaintiff appealed (106 Or. 1, 210 Pac. 716, 27 A. L.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. StevinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Smith v. CameronOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Neitzel v. Spokane International Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Minnesota Canal & Power Co. v. Fall Lake Boom Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
  5. Blackwell Lumber Co. v. Empire Mill Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. National Gettysburg Battlefield Tower, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  2. Morrison v. Clackamas CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Hughes v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Coos Bay Logging Co. v. BarclayOregon Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Northern Wasco County People's Utility District v. Wasco CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1957

11 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