Home/Nebraska Supreme Court/City of Fairbury v. Fairbury Mill & Elevator Co.

City of Fairbury v. Fairbury Mill & Elevator Co.

243 N.W. 774, 123 Neb. 588, 1932 Neb. LEXIS 245
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 19, 1932
DocketNo. 27949
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 243 N.W. 774 (City of Fairbury v. Fairbury Mill & Elevator Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of Fairbury v. Fairbury Mill & Elevator Co., 243 N.W. 774, 123 Neb. 588, 1932 Neb. LEXIS 245 (Neb. 1932).

Opinion

Day, J.

This is an appeal from an order of the department of public works, permitting the city of Fairbury to construct certain retards and deflectors in the Little Blue river near Fairbury, Nebraska. The appellant is the Fairbury Mill & Elevator Company, which has dammed and used the water of the Little Blue for more than 58 years, for manufacturing purposes. The city of Fairbury takes water out of the mill-pond about a third of a mile upstream for cooling its turbine engines used in connection with the municipal light and water plant. The city has appropriated 16.7 cubic feet per second of water subject to all prior rights of the mill company to the use of the water. After using the water it is returned to the stream and, passes down to the mill-dam. The river now divides into two branches about one half mile above the dam, most of the water running down the south branch of the stream. Prior to 1901, when the south channel was cut by a flood, [590]*590all the water of the stream ran down the present north channel. The city takes its water out of the north branch. The branches unite above the mill-dam, which backs its pondage up both branches. The north branch did not carry enough water to supply the city’s necessity and it sought to divert enough water into the north branch to meet its requirements. To accomplish this it sought to build a deflector where the stream branches and another at its intake. These furnish the basis of the mill’s objections. Another was built at a point to keep the water in the north branch from running between two islands back into the south branch; but, since no objection is made to this deflector, it need not be mentioned again. In order that the situation may be more apparent to the reader, we reproduce a map from the record:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Plunkett v. Parsons
10 N.W.2d 469 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1943)
Enterprise Irrigation District v. Willis
284 N.W. 326 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
243 N.W. 774, 123 Neb. 588, 1932 Neb. LEXIS 245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-fairbury-v-fairbury-mill-elevator-co-neb-1932.