Nicomen Boom Co. v. North Shore Boom & Driving Co.
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of tlie superior court for Pacific county, Albertson, J., entered March 12, 1904, upon conclusions of law in favor of the defendant, after finding the facts on a trial on the merits before the court without a jury, dismissing an action to- enjoin the construction of a boom.
1Opinion of the CourtHadley, J.
This is a contest between two boom companies, their booms being located near the mouth of Forth river, in Pacific county, Washington. The action is in equity, and was commenced by the Ficomen Boom Company for the purpose of restraining the defendant, the Forth Shore Boom & Driving Company, from constructing a boom upon a portion of the waters of said river, and within the limits of territory included in the plat filed by the plaintiff company, as required by law. Both companies are organized under the laws of this state; which authorize the organization of corporations for the purpose of…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Welsh v. . TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Railway Co. v. AllingSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Samish River Boom Co. v. Union Boom Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1903
- Barlow v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific R. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1870
- Pittsburgh, Ft. Wayne & Chicago Ry. v. PeetSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- State ex rel. Nicomen Boom Co. v. North Shore Boom & Driving Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1909
- East Bay Municipal Utility District v. City of LodiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Sandy River Coal Co. v. Champion Bridge Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
- Neitzel v. Spokane International Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1914
- State Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. Inland Forwarding Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1931
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.