Underwood Lumber Co. v. Pelican Boom Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEALS from the Circuit Court for Waupaca County. The following statement of the case was prepared by Mr. Justice Oassoday: It appears from the record that Boone lake is situated mostly on section 31, town 37, range 9 east; that the outlet of said lake is through an arm of the same, southerly into the Wisconsin river, at or near the line between that section and section 6, town 36, of the same range; that in 1878 the defendants the Browns and Anderson owned fractional lots…
Read the full summary
APPEALS from the Circuit Court for Waupaca County. The following statement of the case was prepared by Mr. Justice Oassoday: It appears from the record that Boone lake is situated mostly on section 31, town 37, range 9 east; that the outlet of said lake is through an arm of the same, southerly into the Wisconsin river, at or near the line between that section and section 6, town 36, of the same range; that in 1878 the defendants the Browns and Anderson owned fractional lots 1 and 11, bordering on said river in said section 6, and fractional lots 4, 5, and 6, bordering on said lake in said…
1Opinion of the CourtCassoday, J.
The Pelican Boom Company was created and organized without stock in 1882, under ch. 86, R. S., and the several acts amendatory thereof, for the purposes set forth in the foregoing statement. Before the grievances complained of, the articles of incorporation of the company were amended, and the same was thereby made a stock company; and the property belonging to the Browns and Anderson, and the rights, authority, and power acquired by them under ch. 217, Laws of 1882, and ch. 253, Laws of 1887, were transferred and conveyed to said corporation, as set forth in said statement. Since such…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Clark v. BarnardSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- J. S. Keator Lumber Co. v. St. Croix Boom Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
- Green County v. ConnessSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Pere Marquette Boom Co. v. AdamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Wisconsin River Improvement Co. v. MansonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Appeal of Black Hawk Land Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Falls Manufacturing Co. v. Oconto River Improvement Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
- Wishkah Boom Co. v. Greenwood Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1915
- Sauntry v. Laird, Norton Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
- Grays Harbor Boom Co. v. LownsdaleWashington Supreme Court · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.