Legal Opinion

McDaniel v. City of Cherryvale

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided December 6, 1913No. 18,427PublishedCited by 56 opinions

Appeal from Montgomery district court; Thomas J. Flannelly, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Johnston, C. J.:

This was an action to recover for permanent injuries to the plaintiff’s land caused- by the pollution of Drum creek which ran through the land. Drum creek, in its natural state, it was alleged, was a stream of good wholesome water, suitable for live stock and also for culinary and domestic purposes, and was used for such purposes by the plaintiff, James McDaniel, until it became polluted. It was alleged that in 1905 the city of Cherryvale constructed a system of sewers through which sewage was discharged into Drum creek, thus polluting…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Virginia Hot Springs Co. v. McCraySupreme Court of Virginia · 1907
  2. City of Kansas City v. SlangstromSupreme Court of Kansas · 1894
  3. Luengene v. Consumers Light, Heat & Power Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1912
  4. Smith v. City of SedaliaSupreme Court of Missouri · 1912
  5. Parker v. City of AtchisonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1897

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Landers v. East Texas Salt Water Disposal Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Atlas Chemical Industries, Inc. v. AndersonTexas Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Northup v. EakesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  4. Walton v. Phillips Petroleum Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2001
  5. Bolin v. Cessna Aircraft Co.District Court, D. Kansas · 1991

51 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