Legal Opinion

Kougl v. Curry

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided September 22, 1950No. File 9104PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.

The right of the defendants to maintain a dike or levee along the boundary line between forty-acre tracts owned respectively by the parties, and thereby to obstruct the natural drainage of surface waters from plaintiff’s tract, was placed in issue by this action. The trial court concluded that the defendants had acquired a prescriptive right to maintain the levee and thereby to free their property from the flow of surface waters from plaintiff’s property. Judgment was entered for defendants and plaintiff has appealed.

Plaintiff is the owner of the Northwest Quarter (NW1^) of Section Seven (7),…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Thompson v. AndrewsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Mauvaisterre Drainage & Levee District v. Wabash Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1921
  3. First Church of Christ v. RevellSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Davis v. Louisville & N. R.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1921
  5. La Fleur v. KoldaSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1946

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Mulder v. TagueSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Steiner v. County of MarshallSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
  3. J. F. Gioia, Inc. v. Cardinal American Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1985
  4. Thompson v. E.I.G. Palace Mall, LLCSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2003
  5. Heezen v. Aurora CountySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968

15 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