Loranger v. City of Flint
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Genesee; Withey, J., presiding. Bill by Minnie Loranger against the city of Flint to restrain defendant from diverting water from complainant’s mill pond. From a decree for complainant, both parties appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtBrooke, C. J.
(after stating the facts). Defendant’s first position is: That the defendant city has the absolute paramount right to divert from the Flint river (a public navigable stream) sufficient water for the use of the inhabitants of said city, for fire, domestic, sanitary, and other public purposes. That such right is superior to all riparian property rights acquired by complainant and her grantors. That all such rights now possessed by complainant in said stream are and always have been subordinate to the rights, of the public.
By section 3247, 1 Comp. Laws, incorporated cities are given authority to…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Illinois Central Railroad v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- United States v. Great Falls Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
- New York City v. PineSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Smith v. . City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Rigney v. Tacoma Light & Water Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1894
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Dock Farish v. Department of Talent and Economic DevelopmentMichigan Court of Appeals · 2021
- Schenk v. City of Ann ArborMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
- Stupak-Thrall v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- Stupak-Thrall v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996