Peotone & Manteno Union Drainage District v. Adams
Appellate Court of Illinois
Mandamus.—Appeal from the Circuit Court of Will County; the Hon. Dorrance Dibell, Judge, presiding.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Lacey
We are of the opinion that it sufficiently appears that appellee had necessity for a tile drain on his own land, for near a quarter of a mile, and that the fall was nothing on his land toward the main tile drain, but in that distance the fall was the other way about seven inches. This would show that, by carrying back of a fall the length of his proposed tile ditch, he could not give his tile grade from the upper end sufficient to drain his land without running out at the top of the ground before reaching the upper end; he would not have ample capacity, according to the original intention,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Brokaw v. Commissioners of HighwaysIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
- County of St. Clair v. People ex rel. KellerIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
- Board of Supervisors v. People ex rel. CaldwellIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
- Dayton & Troy Electric Ry. Co. v. BradfordOhio Court of Appeals · 1923
3Cited by5 opinions
- Beem v. DavisIdaho Supreme Court · 1918
- Staley v. Commissioner of HighwaysAppellate Court of Illinois · 1919
- Harmon Drainage District No. 2 v. ParkerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1916
- Langan v. Milk's Grove Special Drainage District No. 1Appellate Court of Illinois · 1908
- Langan v. Milk's Grove Special Drainage District No. 1Appellate Court of Illinois · 1908