Legal Opinion

George v. FISH CREEK IRRIGATION DITCH COMPANY

Montana Supreme Court

Decided July 22, 1959No. 9791PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE HARRISON:

This is an action to abate as a nuisance a dam owned by the defendants and to enjoin defendants from restoring the dam to its present condition without affording an outlet for silt, debris, ice and other accumulations.

By their complaint the plaintiffs charged negligence in the construction of the dam in that defendants failed to provide any opening through which silt or refuse could be released, or to install a dam of a type which might be dropped or folded at times of flood or when not required to divert water; that by reason of such facts the river channel was…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Langston v. CurrieMontana Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Nolan v. BenninghoffMontana Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Cook v. HudsonMontana Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Gilcrest v. BowenMontana Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Feeley v. FeeleyMontana Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Bender v. BenderMontana Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Bouma v. Bynum Irrigation DistrictMontana Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Favero v. WynachtMontana Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Hughes v. KingMontana Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Fadness v. KuntzMontana Supreme Court · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API