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

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
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 : 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

SCHODDE V. TWIN FALLS LAND & WATER CO., 224 U. S. 107 (1912)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 224 U. S. 107 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Schodde v. Twin Falls Land & Water Co., 224 U.S. 107 (1912)

Schodde v. Twin Falls Land & Water Company

No. 2

Argued March 7, 8, 1911

Decided April 1, 1912

224 U.S. 107


Under the laws of Idaho relating to appropriation of water, the extent of beneficial use is an inherent and necessary limitation upon the right to appropriate, and one who appropriates does not have further right to the current of the stream for the purpose of obtaining power to distribute the water required for the beneficial use which is the basis of his appropriation.

There is no rule of riparian rights in Idaho by which one whose land borders on a stream can appropriate the whole current thereof for the purpose of making fruitful the limited appropriation of water to which he is entitled for beneficial use.

The federal courts below rightly followed the decisions of the state courts of Idaho in holding that the common law doctrine of riparian rights had been abrogated to the extent that the provisions of the Constitution and statutes of Idaho in regard to the right of appropriators for beneficial use are in conflict therewith.

In this case, held that one who had lawfully appropriated the amount of water from a stream in Idaho to which he was lawfully entitled for beneficial use could not restrain those below him from raising the river so as to interfere with the power necessary to raise the water appropriated by him to a height necessary for distribution over his land; neither his appropriation nor his riparian rights gave him any control over the current of the stream.

161 F. 43 affirmed.

The facts, which involve the extent of the right to appropriate water in Idaho, are stated in the opinion. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 224 U. S. 114

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™