Legal Opinion

Bayou Meto Drainage District v. Ingram

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided July 7, 1924PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.

The drainage district which is the appellant in this action is one formed in Lonoke County under the general statutes of the State providing for what is commonly termed the alternative system of drainage districts. Crawford & Moses’ Digest, §§ 3607 et seq. The organization included a large area in Lonoke County for drainage purposes, and provided for the construction of a main ditch or canal running in a south-, easterly direction and emptying into the stream called Bayou Meto near the southeastern boundary of the county. Bayou Meto was to be the outlet for the flow of water from the end of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Grassy Slough Drainage District No. 1 v. National Box Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
  2. Indian Bayou Drainage District v. WaltSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Lesser-Goldman Cotton Co. v. Cache River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  2. Drainage Dist. 18, Craighead County v. CornishSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939
  3. Williams v. Village Creek, White River & Mayberry Levee & Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1985
  4. Clay v. EnglandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
  5. Grassy Lake & Tyronza Drainage District No. 9 v. Drainage District No. 17Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API