State v. Apfelbacher
Wisconsin Supreme Court
167 N.W. 244, 167 Wis. 233 (1918)
- Written by Curtis Parvin, JD
Facts
Humphrey (defendant) operated a gristmill powered by the Bark River outlet from Lake Nagawicka, facilitated by a dam controlled by Humphrey. George Apfelbacher (plaintiff) had a similar but later-established gristmill operation downstream from Humphrey’s operation, also facilitated by a dam. Both mill operations coexisted and operated continuously with the natural flow of the Bark River. The State of Wisconsin (the state) (defendant) built a fish hatchery between the two mill operations using water diverted from the Bark River. The state contracted with Humphrey to ensure water availability and maintenance of Lake Nagawicka. The contract required Humphrey to cease his mill operations if the lake’s waters receded more than twelve inches because of the state’s fish-hatchery operation. When Humphrey ceased operations due to lowered lake levels, as required by the contract with the state, the water flow to Apfelbacher’s mill diminished, significantly interfering with Apfelbacher’s business. Apfelbacher sued the state and Humphrey seeking injunctive relief. The trial court issued a judgment holding that the state’s use of the water was unreasonable.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Eschweiler, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.