Legal Opinion

Macartor v. Graylyn Crest III Swim Club, Inc.

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided July 6, 1961PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Seitz, Chancellor:

The parties in this case are neighboring landowners contesting their respective rights tó a supply of what the parties agree is percolating underground water. Defendant has moved to dismiss the first three causes of action. Plaintiffs have countered with a demand for summary judgment in the first cause of action.

In their first cause of action plaintiffs allege that they are the owners and inhabitants of a residential dwelling located near a suburban area known .as Graylyn Crest III. Plaintiffs in the past have supplied their household water needs from a well on their…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Katz v. WalkinshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Rose v. Socony-Vacuum Corp.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1934
  3. Staats v. HubbardCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1949
  4. Pecos County Water Control & Improvement District No. 1 v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1954
  5. Little v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1907

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. MacArtor v. The Graylyn Crest III Swim Club, Inc.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1963
  2. MacArtor v. Graylyn Crest III Swim Club, Inc.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1961

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API