Legal Opinion

Squaw Creek Irrigation District v. Mamero

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 1, 1923PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCOURT, J.

Plaintiff is an irrigation district. It prosecutes this appeal from a decree dismissing its complaint, in which it prayed for a decree restraining defendants C. N. Sorenson, Water-master, and Percy A. Cupper, State Engineer, from distributing the waters of Squaw Creek, Deschutes County, in violation of the alleged rights of plaintiff to the use of the waters of that stream.

Besides the officials above named, a number of individuals and corporations were named as defendants, all of whom made default. No further notice need be taken of the defaulting parties.

When the cause was at issue, it was…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Hough v. PorterOregon Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Nevada Ditch Co. v. BennettOregon Supreme Court · 1896
  3. In re Willow CreekOregon Supreme Court · 1914
  4. In Re Waters of Chewaucan RiverOregon Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Wimer v. SimmonsOregon Supreme Court · 1895

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Norwood v. Eastern Oregon Land Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Haney v. Neace-Stark Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Broughton v. StricklinOregon Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Hutchinson v. StricklinOregon Supreme Court · 1934
  5. State Ex Rel. Johnson v. StewartOregon Supreme Court · 1940

3 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