Freeman v. City of Lake Mills
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.
The point first to be considered is as to whether any liability rests upon the appellant for using Rock creek in the way it does as an outlet for its surface waters. It must be conceded that the appellant, a city, has the same right with reference to surface waters as an individual would have, although the rule is usually phrased to read that the municipality has no greater rights than the individual. Hoyt v. Hudson (1871), 27 Wis. 656. This rule has been recognized in Wisconsin as well as in other states. Roe v. Howard County (1906), 75 Neb. 448, 106 N. W. 587; Pettigrew v. Evansville…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Pettigrew v. Village of EvansvilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
- Hoyt v. City of HudsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- Jordan v. City of BenwoodWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1896
- Roe v. Howard CountyNebraska Supreme Court · 1906
- Manteufel v. WetzelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. DeetzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- Getka v. LaderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
- Tiedeman v. Village of MiddletonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
- Watters v. National Drive-In, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1954
- Bratonja v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958