Legal Opinion

Willis v. City of Perry

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided October 22, 1894PublishedCited by 19 opinions

Appeal from Dallas District Court. — Hon. J. H. Hendebson, Judge. Action for damages caused by diverting water from a flowing well. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtKinne, J.

The undisputed facts in this case are that, in 1888, plaintiff sunk a well on her lot in the city of Perry, Iowa, and secured a flow of water therefrom, which rose to a height of several feet above the surface of the ground. She erected a bath house, and piped the water from the well into said house and the bath tubs therein, and built up a large aud profitable business. In 1890 one Blank sunk a well on his ground, near to plaintiff’s well; and, very soon after, one Burlington sunk a well on his land near plaintiff’s well. Both the Blank and Burlington wells were situated on ground…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. City of Teree Haute v. HudnutIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Jones v. AdamsNevada Supreme Court · 1885
  3. Chandler v. AllisonMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
  4. Hanson v. McCueCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
  5. Dumont v. KelloggMichigan Supreme Court · 1874

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Huber v. MerkelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
  2. People v. HulbertMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Hathorn v. . Natural Carbonic Gas Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1909
  4. Konig v. Nevada-California-Oregon RailwayNevada Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Gagnon v. French Lick Springs Hotel Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1904

14 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