Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Re Determination of Water Rights of Hood River.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 6, 1923Published

1Concurrence

McBRIDE, C. J.,

Specially Concurring. — I concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Bean. In my opinion the whole case turns upon the constitutionality of Sections 5715, 5716 and 5717, Or. L.

In the first section above quoted it is provided that all waters in the state, from all sources of supply, belong to the public. By the second section it is provided that, subject to existing rights as therein provided, waters may be appropriated for beneficial use, but that the section shall not be construed to take away or impair the vested right of any person, firm, corporation or association to any water.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Whitney v. Wheeler Cotton MillsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
  2. Hutchinson v. ChaseSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1855
  3. Gould v. Boston Duck Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1859
  4. Peters v. CarrSupreme Court of Missouri · 1852
  5. Knapp v. Douglas Axe Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1866

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API