Legal Opinion

Shepardson v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 25, 1955No. 33573PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBoslaugh, J.

Appellees seek an injunction to compel appellant to restore the waters of Omaha Creek to their natural flow; to prevent appellants from interfering with the natural flow of waters of Omaha Creek; and to recover damages from appellant alleged to have been caused to the property of appellees by the interference of appellant with the natural flow of waters of the creek. The district court found the facts in favor of appellees, decreed them the relief they sought, and denied the motion of appellant for a new trial. This appeal challenges the correctness of the findings and judgment.

The cause of…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Archer v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. GrablinNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
  3. In Re Hendricksen's EstateNebraska Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Keim v. DowningNebraska Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Faught v. Platte Valley Public Power & Irrigation DistrictNebraska Supreme Court · 1947

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Kuhlmann v. Platte Valley Irrigation DistrictNebraska Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Young v. YoungNebraska Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Bahm v. RaikesNebraska Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Ed Steffen v. the County of CumingNebraska Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Konop v. KnobelNebraska Supreme Court · 1958

5 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