Hinesley v. Crum
Indiana Supreme Court
From Clinton Circuit Court; Joseph Combs, Judge. Drainage petition by Silas W. Crum and another, against which Daniel Hinesley and others remonstrate. From a judgment for petitioners, remonstrants appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtMonks, J.
This proceeding was brought by appellees in the court below, under section nineteen of the drainage law of 1907 (Acts 1907 p. 501, §6174 Burns 1908), for the purpose of changing, improving and extending a certain drain already established, by tiling and covering the existing drain, and changing the line thereof wherever it might' be necessary to make an effective drain, etc.
It appears from the record that there has been a public *12drain established and constructed, commencing on what is known as the “ Stoms land,” and extending thence in a northwesterly direction a distance of two miles, or…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- New Jersey, Indiana & Illinois Railroad v. TuttIndiana Supreme Court · 1907
- Oliver v. Monona CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Culbertson v. KnightIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
- Clay v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1905
- Conner v. WoodfillIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Thomas R. Crowel v. Marshall County Drainage BoardIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
- Hubenthal v. CrainIndiana Supreme Court · 1959
- Watson v. ArmstrongIndiana Supreme Court · 1913