Legal Opinion

Clark v. Cambridge & Arapahoe Irrigation & Improvement Co.

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided September 18, 1895No. 7594PublishedCited by 24 opinions

Appeal from the district court of Furnas county. Heard below before Welty, J. There is a statement of the case in the opinion, As to title to the water rights and character of the stream the following authorities are cited: Illinois C. R. Co. v. People, 146 U. S., 387; Jones v. Soulard, 24 How. [U. S.], 41; Smith v. (My of Rochester, 92 N. Y., 463; Chenango Bridge Co. v. Paige, 83 N. Y., 178; Avery v. Fox, 1 Abb. [U. S.], 246; The “Montello,” 20 Wall. [ü.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the district court of Furnas county. Heard below before Welty, J. There is a statement of the case in the opinion, As to title to the water rights and character of the stream the following authorities are cited: Illinois C. R. Co. v. People, 146 U. S., 387; Jones v. Soulard, 24 How. [U. S.], 41; Smith v. (My of Rochester, 92 N. Y., 463; Chenango Bridge Co. v. Paige, 83 N. Y., 178; Avery v. Fox, 1 Abb. [U. S.], 246; The “Montello,” 20 Wall. [ü. S.], 430. The mill is a public nuisance and subject to abatement. (Wood, Nuisance [2d ed.], 80, 792; Cooley, Torts, 612, 614; Rhodes v.…

1Opinion of the CourtPost, J.

This is an appeal from a decree of the district court for Furnas county perpetually restraining the defendant the Cambridge & Arapahoe Irrigation and Improvement Company from diverting the waters of the Republican river for the purpose of irrigation by means of a ditch or canal of which the defendant company is the owner and proprietor. It is in the petition, in- substance, alleged that the plaintiff, in the year 1879, in said county, erected a mill for the purpose of grinding grain, and has since the completion thereof in the year mentioned continuously used and operated said mill for the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. The MontelloSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  3. Miller v. Mayor of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  4. Reno Smelting, Milling & Reduction Works v. StevensonNevada Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Potomac Steamboat Co. v. Upper Potomac Steamboat Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1884

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Nebraska v. WyomingSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Board of Directors v. CollinsNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Enterprise Irrigation District v. Tri-State Land Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Cummings v. HyattNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Kinkead v. TurgeonNebraska Supreme Court · 1905

19 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