Legal Opinion

Hillebrand v. Knapp

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided August 13, 1937No. File No. 8044PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRoberts', J.

Rush Lake during periods of normal rainfall is a body of water with an area of about 3,000 acres. When the government survey of contiguous land was made, this lake was meandered. Títere has been a recession of waters occasioned by years of drouth until this former lake bed is. dry. Plaintiff owner of lots or fractional divisions bordering on the meander line instituted this action to enjoin defendant from cutting and removing hay from the portion of the lake bed within the meandered line contiguous to the land of the plaintiff. Defendant denies that plaintiff has airy right, title, or…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Lamprey v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  2. Flisrand v. MadsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Parsons v. City of Sioux FallsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Sapp v. FrazierSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1899
  5. Anderson v. RaySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest v. HassellCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1992
  2. People Ex Rel. Baker v. MacKCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
  3. J.J.N.P. Co. v. State Ex Rel. Division of Wildlife ResourcesUtah Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Parks v. CooperSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Hitchings v. Del Rio Woods Recreation & Park DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976

10 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