Exchange Trust Co. v. Drainage Dist. No. 7, Poinsett Cty.
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Taft
Roy Rice and others were homesteaders under the United States statutes upon lands of the Government situate in Poinsett County, Arkansas. The lands were in ■ Drainage District No. 7 of Poinsett County. Drainage •District No. 7 had been organized under a special act of the Legislature of Arkansas. Arkansas Acts of 1917, p. 1053. As originally formed, the district consisted of lands west of the St. Francis River in Poinsett County. Rice and others had their homestead locations in that county east of the St. Francis River. Their lands were flooded by the waters of a drainage district organized…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Witherspoon v. DuncanSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- National Bank v. County of YanktonSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Irwin v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Utter v. FranklinSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Read v. PlattsmouthSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Fox Film Corp. v. DoyalSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Kaneb Services, Inc., Southwestern Group Financial, Inc. And United Savings Association of Texas v. Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, Kaneb Services, Inc. v. Federal Savings and Loan Insurance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Luehrmann v. Drainage Dist. No. 7 of Poinsett County, Ark.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1939
- Technicon Medical Information Systems Corp. v. Green Bay Packaging Inc., St. Vincent Hospital, and Leo N. CrowleyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
- Varney River Drainage District v. SpiedelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.