NicoulIn Vs. O'Brien

Nicoulin vs O'Brien

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Dec-09-1918

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/92754

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/92754
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: Dec-09-1918
Case Number: 248 U.S. 113
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nicoulin

Respondent

O'Brien

Excerpt

.....of concurrent jurisdiction by the virginia compact. 172 ky. 473 affirmed. the case is stated in the opinion. page 248 u. s. 114 memorandum opinion by mr. justice mc reynolds. plaintiff in error was adjudged guilty of violating the prohibition of a kentucky statute by seining for fish in the ohio river south of low water mark on the indiana side. 172 ky. 473. we are asked to hold that, by reason of the virginia compact (13 hening's statutes at large, c. 14, pp. 17, 19), kentucky had no power to regulate fishing in the river at that point without indiana's concurrence. the provision relied upon is this: "seventh, that the use and navigation of the river ohio, so far as the territory of the proposed state, or the territory which shall remain within the limits of this commonwealth lies thereon, shall be free and common to the citizens of the united states, and the respective jurisdictions of this commonwealth and of the proposed state on the river as aforesaid, shall be concurrent only with the states which may possess the opposite shores of the said river." the territorial limits of kentucky extend across the river to low water mark on the northerly shore. indiana v. kentucky, 136 u. s. 479 , 136 u. s. 519 . and we think it clear that no limitation upon the power of that commonwealth to protect fish within her own boundaries by proper legislation resulted from the mere establishment of concurrent jurisdiction by the virginia compact. see wedding v. meyler, 192 u. s. 573 ; central r. co. v. jersey city, 209 u. s. 473 ; nielsen v. oregon, 212 u. s. 315 ; mcgowan v. columbia river packers' assn., 245 u. s. 352 . the judgment below is affirmed.

Full Judgment

Nicoulin v. O'Brien - 248 U.S. 113 (1918)
U.S. Supreme Court Nicoulin v. O'Brien, 248 U.S. 113 (1918)

Nicoulin v. O'Brien

No. 113

Submitted October 21, 1918

Decided December 9, 1918

248 U.S. 113

ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF KENTUCKY

SYLLABUS

The territorial limits of Kentucky extend across the Ohio River to low water mark on the Indiana side, and no limitation on the power of Kentucky to protect fish within those limits by proper legislation resulted from the establishment of concurrent jurisdiction by the Virginia Compact.

172 Ky. 473 affirmed.

The case is stated in the opinion.

Page 248 U. S. 114

Memorandum opinion by MR. JUSTICE Mc REYNOLDS.

Plaintiff in error was adjudged guilty of violating the prohibition of a Kentucky statute by seining for fish in the Ohio River south of low water mark on the Indiana side. 172 Ky. 473. We are asked to hold that, by reason of the Virginia Compact (13 Hening's Statutes at Large, c. 14, pp. 17, 19), Kentucky had no power to regulate fishing in the river at that point without Indiana's concurrence. The provision relied upon is this:

"Seventh, that the use and navigation of the River Ohio, so far as the territory of the proposed state, or the territory which shall remain within the limits of this commonwealth lies thereon, shall be free and common to the citizens of the United States, and the respective jurisdictions of this commonwealth and of the proposed state on the river as aforesaid, shall be concurrent only with the states which may possess the opposite shores of the said river."

The territorial limits of Kentucky extend across the river to low water mark on the northerly shore. Indiana v. Kentucky, 136 U. S. 479 , 136 U. S. 519 . And we think it clear that no limitation upon the power of that commonwealth to protect fish within her own boundaries by proper legislation resulted from the mere establishment of concurrent jurisdiction by the Virginia Compact. See Wedding v. Meyler, 192 U. S. 573 ; Central R. Co. v. Jersey City, 209 U. S. 473 ; Nielsen v. Oregon, 212 U. S. 315 ; McGowan v. Columbia River Packers' Assn., 245 U. S. 352 .

The judgment below is

Affirmed.

Same Parties Nicoulin vs O'Brien Same Subject MRTP