From our private database of 37,200+ case briefs...
Arizona Copper Co. v. Gillespie
United States Supreme Court
230 U.S. 46 (1913)
Facts
William Gillespie (plaintiff) owned farmland on the Gila River. Gillespie and prior owners had used water from the river to irrigate and cultivate the land since 1872. Many other farmers in the same valley relied on the river, and a large agricultural community grew up dependent on irrigation. Meanwhile, Arizona Copper Company and Shannon Copper Company (defendants) mined copper in the mountains above the farmland using water from Gila River tributaries to reduce and concentrate copper ore. Before 1885, the mining operations did not appear to seriously pollute the water, but when the mines expanded and adopted concentrators, they deposited slimes, slickens, and tailings into the water that were carried through irrigation canals and deposited on the farmers’ fields. Gillespie sued to enjoin the mines from polluting the water. The trial court found that the amount of pollutants the mines discharged continuously increased even after institution of the suit and enjoined the pollution. Shannon Copper settled by agreeing to spare no reasonable effort or expense to minimize the contamination and immediately designed and built large settling basins that kept most of the contaminants from its mine out of the river. The Arizona territorial supreme court modified the injunction to allow installation of the settling basins but otherwise affirmed the judgment. Arizona Copper appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lurton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 630,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 37,200 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.