Mobile Transportation Co. v. City of Mobile
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Mobile Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. Thomas H. Smith. Action by the Mobile Transportation Company against the city of Mobile and others to enjoin interference with riparian rights. From a decree dismissing the bill for want of equity, plaintiff appeals. Fresh water rivers of whatever kind so ever belong to the owners of the soil adjacent thereto. — ; Smith v. Rochester, 24 Am.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Mobile Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. Thomas H. Smith. Action by the Mobile Transportation Company against the city of Mobile and others to enjoin interference with riparian rights. From a decree dismissing the bill for want of equity, plaintiff appeals. Fresh water rivers of whatever kind so ever belong to the owners of the soil adjacent thereto. — ; Smith v. Rochester, 24 Am. Hep. 393. Therefore, the shore between high and low water mark belongs to the' appellant. — Bulloch v. Wilson, 2 Port. 436; Webb. v. Dcmopolis, 95 Ala. 116. This fact cannot be shown in a court of law. —…
1Opinion of the CourtTyson, C. J.
— In this case the appellant filed a bill to enjoin the enforcing of an exclusive possession of the shore of the Mobile river in front of its land under a writ of possession duly issued on a judgment in ejectment. The bill was dismissed on motion for want of equity, and this appeal is to reverse that decree.
No decree was entered upon the demurrer which was interposed to the bill, and therefore on this hearing we have only to deal Avith the question of error vel non in the decree as to the motion. Of course, the very frame of the bill admits the effective assertion at laAv of the legal title…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Shively v. BowlbySupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Webb v. City of DemopolisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
- People v. MayesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Kane v. New York Elevated RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Mobile Transportation Co. v. MobileSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
3Cited by7 opinions
- Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest v. HassellCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1992
- Stewart v. . TurneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
- United States v. TurnerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1949
- Ex Parte Cove Properties, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2000
- McDonnell v. Murnan Shipbuilding CorporationSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.