Legal Opinion

Anneberg v. Kurtz

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided January 7, 1944No. 14717PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Atkinson, Justice.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The defendant, in an amendment to his answer, admitted that he had been operating a canning planf and dumping tomato peelings and refuse from the plant into the creek; but alleged a prescriptive easement so to do by reason of having done so from June 1st to November 1st of each year for the past thirty-three years. This presents*two questions for decision: (1) Can an easement by prescription ripen by reason of such seasonal use of the stream? (2) Would these acts, though amounting to a private nuisance, ripen into a prescriptive easement?

T…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. City Council v. LombardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
  2. Inhabitants of Stoughton v. BakerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
  3. Glantz v. GabelMontana Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Goble v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938
  5. Bonner v. WelbornSupreme Court of Georgia · 1849

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Roughton v. THIELE KAOLIN COMPANYSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953
  2. Kogod v. CogitoCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
  3. Davis v. City of ForsythCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2005
  4. Smejkal v. Empire Lite-Rock, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Chamblee v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946

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