Legal Opinion

Bowles v. City of Enid

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided May 27, 1952No. 34932PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Neal, J.

The city of Enid, a municipal corporation, filed its petition in the district court of Major county, alleging that under the laws of the state it is authorized to exercise the right of eminent domain for the purpose of acquiring a public water supply system to furnish water to the residents of the city of Enid. Thereafter, the judge of the district court appointed commissioners with instructions to inspect the property and water rights sought to be appropriated by the city and consider the injury that the owners will sustain by such appropriation of said easement and rights specifically…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  2. Ohio Oil Company v. IndianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  3. Canada v. City of ShawneeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  4. City of Stillwater v. CundiffSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
  5. Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Town of FairfaxSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. STATE ex rel. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OKLAHOMA v. JOHNSON & JOHNSONSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2021
  2. Field v. Oklahoma Water Resources BoardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
  3. Lough v. Town of MulhallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1966
  4. Opinion No. (1997), Oklahoma Attorney General Reports1997
  5. STATE ex rel. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OKLAHOMA v. JOHNSON & JOHNSONSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2021

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