Legal Opinion

City of Tulsa v. Edwards

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided September 15, 1925No. 15789PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

MAXEY, C.

The facts out of which this controversy grows are as follows: The city of Tulsa, a municipal corporation of Tul'sa county, Okla. was and is constructing a water supply system for said city, known and designated generally as the Spavinaw Water Supply System. In the construction of the reservoir caused by the damming of Spavinaw creek in Mayes county, the said Spavinaw creek or river was dammed by the building of a lalnge concrete dam at a point down stream, approximately four or five miles from the westerly line of Delaware county. Certain lands in both Mayes and Delaware…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Adams v. Heirs of McKinneySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
  2. Tibbetts v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
  3. Adams v. MottleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
  4. Romero v. RomeroNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1924

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bradford v. SchmuckerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1943
  2. Kirsch v. TracySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  3. Norton v. BarefootSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
  4. Schuman v. PriceSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API