Huber v. Merkel
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of tie circuit court for Washington county: James J. Dick, Circuit Judge. This is an action in equity, brought by the owner of certain real estate, to restrain the defendant, who owns real estate in the vicinity, from wasting or unreasonably using the water from certain artesian wells upon the defendant’s land, on the ground that such use interfered with the flow of water from the plaintiff’s artesian well, situated on his land.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of tie circuit court for Washington county: James J. Dick, Circuit Judge. This is an action in equity, brought by the owner of certain real estate, to restrain the defendant, who owns real estate in the vicinity, from wasting or unreasonably using the water from certain artesian wells upon the defendant’s land, on the ground that such use interfered with the flow of water from the plaintiff’s artesian well, situated on his land. The action was tried by the court, and findings were made in substance as follows: That plaintiff and defendant are farmers and reside upon and…
1Opinion of the CourtWinslow, J.
The principles of the common law regulating the rights of landowners in subterranean waters are well understood. If the waters simply percolate through the ground, without definite channel, they belong to the realty in which they are found, and the owner of the soil may divert, consume, or cut them off with impunity. If, on the other hand, the subterranean waters flow in a defined channel, the rules which govern the use of surface streams apply; but the presumption is that the waters are percolating waters until it is shown that they are supplied by a definite, flowing stream. Gould, Waters,…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Ohio Oil Company v. IndianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Atchison v. PetersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- State ex rel. Zillmer v. KreutzbergWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
- Forbell v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Roath v. DriscollSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1850
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- State v. EsserWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- State ex rel. Carnation Milk Products Co. v. EmeryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
- Gas Products Co. v. RankinMontana Supreme Court · 1922
- State v. DeetzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- Kuhl Motor Co. v. Ford Motor Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.