Legal Opinion

Wasserburger v. Coffee

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1966No. 36049PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.

Riparian owners complained that they no longer could water cattle in creeks running through their lands, because upper irrigators were exhausting the streams by diversions pursuant to appropriation permits from the State of Nebraska. The district court found that the owners were entitled to the use of the streams for watering the number of cattle normally pastured on those parcels which were riparian but not on larger contiguous parcels in the same ownership, and the court accordingly enjoined the appropriators.

The hydra of perplexity in this case emerged from the dual administration of water…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Crawford Co. v. HathawayNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Rancho Santa Margarita v. VailCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Meng v. CoffeeNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Clark v. Cambridge & Arapahoe Irrigation & Improvement Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1895

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. In Re Application A-16642Nebraska Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Spear T Ranch, Inc. v. KnaubNebraska Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Upper Big Blue Natural Resources District v. City of FremontNebraska Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Franco-American Charolaise, Ltd. v. Oklahoma Water Resources BoardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1990
  5. Reppun v. Board of Water SupplyHawaii Supreme Court · 1982

7 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