Legal Opinion

Nilsson v. Latimer

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 6, 1984No. 83-201PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Steele Hays, Justice.

Marcella Nilsson, appellant, and Howard Latimer, appellee, are landowners having a common boundary — the Little Cossatot River and Mill Slough. Nilsson sought a declaratory judgment to interpret the language of the deed of each party and to determine their respective rights to the stream bed, contending that Latimer was not a riparian owner. Each owner also claimed damages from the other for unreasonable uses of the water. The Chancellor found Latimer to be a riparian owner and that neither party had made unreasonable use of the water. On appeal, we affirm.

Nilsson’s land…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Little v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
  2. Harris v. BrooksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1955
  3. Gill v. HedgecockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
  4. Kilgo v. CookSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  5. Person v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Mikel v. HubbardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
  2. Burnham v. City of FarmingtonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
  3. Crum v. JamesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2010
  4. Town of Newfane v. WalkerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1993
  5. Nilsson v. LatimerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984

2 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