Legal Opinion

Madison v. Ducktown Sulphur, Copper & Iron Co.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1904PublishedCited by 33 opinions

PROM POLK. Appeal from the Chancery Court of Polk County.— T. M. McConnell, Chancellor.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Neil

■ These three suits were instituted separately in the court below, but tried together here. They embrace, in the main, the same facts and the same questions of law, and will be disposed of in a single opinion.

The bills are all based on the ground of nuisance, in that the two companies, in the operation of their plants at and near Ducktown, in Polk county, in the course of reducing copper ore, cause large volumes of smoke to issue from their roast piles, which smoke descends upon the surrounding lands, and injures trees and crops, and *338renders tbe bornes of complainants less comfortable and…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Mississippi & Missouri Railroad v. WardSupreme Court of the United States · 1863
  2. Parker v. Winnipiseogee Lake Cotton & Woollen Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1863
  3. Irwin v. DixionSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
  4. Chartiers Block Coal Co. v. MellonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  5. People v. Gold Run Ditch & Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1884

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Hulbert v. California Etc. Cement Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  2. United States v. Vertac Chemical Corp.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1980
  3. American Smelting & Refining Co. v. GodfreyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
  4. Hamilton v. MacDonaldCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1974
  5. Union Planters' Bank & Trust Co. v. Memphis Hotel Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1911

28 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