Boise City Artesian Hot & Cold Water Co. v. Boise City
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of t'he United States for the Central Division of the District of Idaho. This action was brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error to recover damages for the wrongful taking of water. The plaintiff in error, as a corporation of the state of West Virginia, and as the owner of waterworks in Boise City, Idaho, set forth two causes of action in its complaint.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of t'he United States for the Central Division of the District of Idaho. This action was brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error to recover damages for the wrongful taking of water. The plaintiff in error, as a corporation of the state of West Virginia, and as the owner of waterworks in Boise City, Idaho, set forth two causes of action in its complaint. The first is an assigned cause of action for damages for taking water prior to the time when it became the owner of the waterworks, and while its immediate predecessors owned and operated…
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
The defendant in error justifies its taking of the water of the plaintiff in error under the provisions of section 2711 of the Statutes of Idaho passed in 1887, which reads as follows:
“All corporations formed to supply water to cities or towns- must furnish pure, fresh water to the inhabitants thereof for family uses so long as the supply remains, at reasonable rates without distinction of person upon their demand therefor, and must furnish water to the extent of their means in case of fire or other great necessities free of charge. The rates to be charged for water must be determined by…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Proprietors of the Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of the Warren BridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1837
- Beer Co. v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Long Island Water Supply Co. v. BrooklynSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Illinois Trust & Savings Bank v. City of Arkansas CityCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1896
- Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railroad v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State ex rel. County Attorney v. Des Moines City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1913
- Omaha & Council Bluffs Street Railway Co. v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1926
- Omaha Electric Light & Power Co. v. City of OmahaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910
- Town of Gans v. Cookson Hills Electric Cooperative, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1955
- Frost v. Corporation Commission of OklahomaDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 1927
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.