CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


MONTEZUMA CANAL CO. V. SMITHVILLE CANAL CO., 218 U. S. 371 (1910)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 218 U. S. 371 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Montezuma Canal Co. v. Smithville Canal Co., 218 U.S. 371 (1910)

Montezuma Canal Co. v. Smithville Canal Company

No. 1

Argued October 21, 24, 1910

Decided November 28, 1910

218 U.S. 371

Syllabus

Where the trial court makes findings of, facts and states conclusions of law thereon but certifies no rulings in respect of evidence, and the supreme court of the territory enters a general judgment of affirmance, manifestly based upon the correctness of such findings of fact, they furnish a sufficient statement for the appeal, and, in this Court, the question is whether they are sufficient to support the decree. Stringfellow v. Cain, 99 U. S. 610.

Notwithstanding there may have been a prior appropriation of water, if the rights of appropriators were adjudicated in a suit of which the parties had notice, the judgment in that suit may be pleaded as res judicata in a subsequent suit to determine the rights of appropriators, and the amount awarded to an appropriator by judgment in the first suit cannot be reduced.

The fact that it is within the legislative power to provide administrative machinery to supervise the common use of water does not render invalid the decree of a court providing such machinery to carry out a particular decree if the court deems it necessary and proper so to do.

As the laws of Arizona authorize the Supreme Court to cause its judgments to be carried into execution, that court does not transcend its authority in appointing a commissioner to supervise the chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 218 U. S. 372

taking of water from a stream by the various appropriators to whom its common use is awarded and in apportioning the expense pro rata between them.

11 Arizona 99 reversed.

The facts, which involve the rights of appropriators of water of a river in Arizona, are stated in the opinion.





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED