Legal Opinion

Edgerton v. Huff

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1866PublishedCited by 14 opinions

APPEAL from the Tippecanoe Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtRat, J.

This is a suit brought by the appellants, who are lessees of the trustees of the Wabash and Erie Canal, against the appellee, claiming the right to control and use the ice formed in that part of said canal kuown as the “ Wide-water,” to the exclusion of the ownér of the lauds through which the canal passes. It was admitted that the taking of the ice by the owner of the fee did not in anywise interfere with the “navigation of the caual, or with the use of the water for hydraulic purposes, and that no injury resulted to the tow-path of the canal, or to the use of said tow-path, by reason of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Chicago & Mississipi Railroad v. PatchinIllinois Supreme Court · 1854
  2. McLachlan v. McLachlanNew York Court of Chancery · 1842
  3. Perley v. ChandlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Water Works Co. v. BurkhartIndiana Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Brookville & Metamora Hydraulic Co. v. ButlerIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
  3. O'Reiley v. Kankakee Valley Draining Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1869
  4. Collett v. Board of CommissionersIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Nelson v. FlemingIndiana Supreme Court · 1877

9 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