Citation network
Ohio Vs. Kentucky
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 21, 1980
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 335 (1980) U.S. Supreme Court Ohio v. KentuckySearch
-
U.S. 335 (1980) Ohio v. KentuckySearch
-
that are applicable in customary situations involving river boundaries between States, do not apply here. Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
usual river boundary between States. It is not like the Missouri River between Iowa and Nebraska, see, e.g., Nebraska v. IowaSearch
-
U. S. 359 (1892), or the Mississippi River between Arkansas and Mississippi. See Mississippi v. ArkansasSearch
-
U. S. 289 (1974), and 415 U. S. 415 U.S. 302 (1974). See also Iowa v. IllinoisSearch
-
Minnesota v. WisconsinSearch
-
Arkansas v. TennesseeSearch
-
however, depending upon historical factors, may well differ from that customary situation. See, for example, Texas v. LouisianaSearch
-
dissent's. If there could be any doubt about this, it surely was dispelled completely when the Court decided Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
Id. at 136 U. S. 508 , 136 U. S. 518 -519. The fact that Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
the applicable principles are the same, and the holding in Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
has pertinent application and is controlling precedent here. The Court's flat pronouncements in Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
Court from concluding that locations specified many decades ago are proper and definitive boundaries. See, e.g., Utah v. UnitedSearch
-
side of its boundary river are not uncommon. See Wilson v. OmahaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. KrogerSearch
-
Attorney General of Kentucky, OAG 63-847, contained in Kentucky Attorney General Opinions 1960-1964. See also Perks v. McCrackenSearch
-
U. S. 641 , 410 U. S. 645 (1973), quoting Handly's lessee v. AnthonySearch
-
of Handly's Lessee. Instead, the Court relies heavily on the Page 444 U. S. 344 decision in Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
There is no sign of an avulsive change in the length of the Ohio River at issue in this case. Moreover, Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
between the two States. See n 3, infra. Absent such a showing, I do not believe the holding in Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
U. S. 158 , 246 U. S. 173 (1918). See Bonelli Cattle Co. v. ArizonaSearch
-
Commonwealth v. HendersonSearch
-
Louisville Sand & Gravel Co. v. RalstonSearch
-
quoting Willis v. BoydSearch
-
be proved that one party has recognized through its actions a riparian boundary claimed by another party. See Michigan v. WisconsinSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Ohio v. KentuckySearch
-
Arkansas and Mississippi. See Mississippi v. ArkansasSearch
-
Texas v. LouisianaSearch
-
Utah v. UnitedSearch
-
See Wilson v. OmahaSearch
-
Perks v. McCrackenSearch
-
Moreover, Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
See Bonelli Cattle Co. v. ArizonaSearch
-
Willis v. BoydSearch
-
See Michigan v. WisconsinSearch
-
Missouri v. NebraskaSearch
-
New Jersey v. DelawareSearch
-
New Hampshire v. MaineSearch
-
Indiana v. KentuckySearch
-
Nebraska v. IowaSearch
-
Iowa v. IllinoisSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial