Legal Opinion

Cornwell Manufacturing Co. v. Swift

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1891PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal from Washtenaw. (Kinne, J.) Bill to restrain the defendants from raising the flushing structure on their mill-dam above a certain height. Complainant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMcGrath, J.

This controversy arises between mill-owners on. the Huron river near Ann Arboi’, and involves flowage and pondage rights.

The course of the section of the stream upon which these mills are located, commencing in the N. W. £ of section 17, in the township of Ann Arbor, is southerly, into the S. W. £ of 17; thence easterly, through the S. £ of 17; thence south-easterly, crossing the N. E. corner of 20, into 21; thence making a sharp bend, and running south-westerly across the S. E. corner of the N. E. £ of 20; thence southerly, and then easterly, through the S. E. £ of 20, into the S. W. £ of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Turner v. HartMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Blake v. CornwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Bigelow v. ShawMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Sheffield Car Co. v. Constantine Hydraulic Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Swan v. MunchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
  3. Felton v. WedthoffMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Dummer v. United States Gypsum Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Miner v. WilsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1895

8 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