|
|
Farmers Irrigation Dist. v. O’shea, 244 U.S. 325 (1917)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Farmers Irrigation Dist. v. O’shea, 244 U.S. 325 (1917)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 244 U.S. 320, click here.
Farmers Irrigation District v. O’Shea No. 215 Submitted April 25, 1917 Decided June 4, 1917 244 U.S. 325
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA
Syllabus
Under § 3438 of the Revised Statutes of Nebraska, 1913, as construed by the supreme court of the state, the owner of an irrigation canal may be compelled to bridge it to afford access between the lands of another which are intersected by it, although the canal was built across the lands by one who owned them at the time and who sold the separated parcels by successive conveyances to their present owner, after the canal had been long in operation and after it had been disposed of to another interest.
In virtue of the right to affix conditions to grants of corporate power, the State of Nebraska, in granting appellant Irrigation District the privilege of obtaining lands for canals, etc., by condemnation, was justified in imposing, by the same law, the duty to build bridges without further compensation in the circumstances indicated in the preceding paragraph, and appellant, having accepted the privilege cum onere, cannot complain that its property is taken in violation of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment when the requirement is enforced, even though the right of way for the particular canal in question was acquired without resort to condemnation.
A state law laying a duty upon all owners of irrigation canals to construct bridges over them for the benefit of abutting lands does not violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in not embracing canals devoted to other uses.
8 Neb. 239 affirmed.
The case is stated in the opinion.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Farmers Irrigation Dist. v. O’shea, 244 U.S. 325 (1917) in 244 U.S. 325 244 U.S. 326. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9P39Q5V4LIUFSS3.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Farmers Irrigation Dist. v. O’shea, 244 U.S. 325 (1917), in 244 U.S. 325, page 244 U.S. 326. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9P39Q5V4LIUFSS3.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Farmers Irrigation Dist. v. O’shea, 244 U.S. 325 (1917). cited in 1917, 244 U.S. 325, pp.244 U.S. 326. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9P39Q5V4LIUFSS3.
|