Legal Opinion

Arnold v. C. Hoffman & Son Milling Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided December 9, 1911No. 17,257PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from Dickinson district court.

1Per curiam

This was an action by Arnold to recover damages resulting from the overflow of his land and the destruction of his crops alleged to have been *13caused by the joint action and wrong of the defendants.

After some preliminary motions and rulings Arnold filed an amended petition alleging that he owned land on the Smoky Hill river; that the defendants had illegally obstructed the flow of the water and threw it back on his farm; that the railway company, in building a bridge below his farm, constructed an embankment and placed about one hundred carloads of stone in the river, which operated to dam the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. City of Kansas City v. SlangstromSupreme Court of Kansas · 1894
  2. Westbrook v. MizeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1886
  3. Bryant v. Bigelow Carpet Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
  4. City of Kansas v. FileSupreme Court of Kansas · 1899
  5. Wilson v. Boise CityIdaho Supreme Court · 1899

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Landers v. East Texas Salt Water Disposal Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1952
  2. McDaniel v. City of CherryvaleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1913
  3. Northup v. EakesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  4. Luengene v. Consumers Light, Heat & Power Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1912
  5. Atkinson v. Herington Cattle Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1968

6 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