Legal Opinion

Haney v. Neace-Stark Co.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 17, 1923Published

1Opinion

Rehearing denied October 23, 1923.

On Petition for Rehearing.

(219 Pac. 190.)

Mr. J. J. Heilner and Messrs. Clifford & Correll, for the petition.

Messrs. McColloch & McCollooh, contra.

BROWN, J.

The Neace-Stark Company, through its attorneys, has filed a petition for a rehearing. *120For a full statement of the facts and issues involved herein, see Haney v. Neace-Stark Co., supra, 94 (216 Pac. 757).

The court expressly set forth in finding of fact No. 18—

“That the extent of appropriations and application and use of water * * cannot be determined in this proceeding from the pleadings and evidence…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Russell v. PlaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Hughes v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
  3. Mayor of Vicksburg v. HensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  4. O'Hara v. ParkerOregon Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Astoria v. Astoria & Columbia River R.Oregon Supreme Court · 1913

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