Otis Co. v. Ludlow Manufacturing Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OP THE STATE OP MASSACHUSETTS. The facts are stated in.the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Holmes
This is a bill in equity, to restrain the defendants in error from flooding the plaintiff’s land by means of a dam erected under the Massachusetts Mill Act. The injunction is asked on alternative ■ grounds — either that the Mill Act does not authorize the dam, or that, if it does, then it is contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. The case was tried in the Superior Court and reported ' to the Supreme Judicial Court, which held that the statute authorized the dam and was validj and ordered the bill be dismissed. 186 Massachusetts, 89. A decree was entered…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Manigault v. SpringsSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Clark v. NashSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Strickley v. Highland Boy Gold Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Head v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Eldridge v. TrezevantSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
3Cited by31 opinions
- Anderson National Bank v. LuckettSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Kotch v. Board of River Port Pilot Comm'rs for Port of New OrleansSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Hairston v. Danville & Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. McGlinn v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Mt. Vernon-Woodberry Cotton Duck Co. v. Alabama Interstate Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.