Trullinger v. Howe
Oregon Supreme Court
From Yamhill: William Galloway, Judge. Statement by Mr. Chief Justice Bean. This is a suit to restrain defendant from interfering with. plaintiff s’ use of the water of the North Yamhill River, for power purposes, by operating splash dams thereon. Plaintiffs are riparian owners, and have a gristmill and light-plant at or near the town of North Yamhill, which are operated by water diverted from the stream by means of a dam and race.
Read the full summary
From Yamhill: William Galloway, Judge. Statement by Mr. Chief Justice Bean. This is a suit to restrain defendant from interfering with. plaintiff s’ use of the water of the North Yamhill River, for power purposes, by operating splash dams thereon. Plaintiffs are riparian owners, and have a gristmill and light-plant at or near the town of North Yamhill, which are operated by water diverted from the stream by means of a dam and race. The mill has been so operated for more than 40 years and the light-plant for more than three years. Defendant has constructed a sawmill at Carlton, four or five…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Bean
The testimony of both parties was directed, in part, to the point whether the North Yamhill River at or above plaintiffs’ mill is a floatable stream, and whether *222plaintiffs’ dam is an unlawful obstruction therein. But the determination of these questions is not really necessary to a decision of the issues. If the stream is navigable or floatable, it is so only during the winter months, and the plaintiffs, as riparian proprietors, have a right to maintain a dam across it for their use, provided it does not materially affect or abridge the use of the stream as a highway at such times, as in its…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- People v. Gold Run Ditch & Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1884
- Woodruff v. North Bloomfield Gravel Mining Co.United States Circuit Court · 1884
- Chenango Bridge Co. v. . PaigeNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Rhodes v. WhiteheadTexas Supreme Court · 1863
- Thunder Bay River Booming Co. v. SpeechlyMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- SWEET v. Irrigation Canal Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1953
- Coquille Mill & Mercantile Co. v. JohnsonOregon Supreme Court · 1908
- Flinn v. VaughnOregon Supreme Court · 1910
- Stephens v. City of EugeneOregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Logan v. Spaulding Logging Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1920
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.