Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Larson Vs. South Dakota

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Feb 18, 1929

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

66 entries 7 linked 59 unlinked
Show
  1. Long Sault Development Co. Vs. Call US Supreme Court · Dec 11, 1916
  2. Huntington Vs. Attrill US Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1892
  3. New Orleans Waterworks Co. Vs. Louisiana US Supreme Court · May 06, 1902
  4. Wright Vs. Nagle US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1879
  5. Jefferson Branch Bank Vs. Skelly US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1861
  6. Providence Bank Vs. Billings US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1830
  7. Fanning Vs. Gregoire US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1853
  8. Larson v. South
    Search
  9. Dakota - 278 U.S. 429 (1929) U.S. Supreme Court Larson v. South
    Search
  10. Dakota, 278 U.S. 429 (1929) Larson v. South
    Search
  11. before it twice before this case, in Nixon v. Reid
    Search
  12. S.D. 507, and in Chamberlain Ferry & Cable Bridge v. King
    Search
  13. the contract means, and whether by a proper construction, the building of a bridge impairs its obligation. Appleby v. City
    Search
  14. Columbia Ry. Co. v. South
    Search
  15. Louisiana Ry. & Navigation Co. v. Behrman
    Search
  16. Mobile & Ohio R. Co. v. Tennessee
    Search
  17. Northwestern University v. Illinois
    Search
  18. Bridge Proprietors v. Hoboken
    Search
  19. necessarily arises that a bridge would be a breach of the leases. Reference is made to Newburgh & C. Turnpike Co. v. Miller
    Search
  20. It was observed in the case of Ogden v. Gibbons
    Search
  21. a public grant like this. The leading case on the subject in federal jurisprudence is that of Charles River Bridge v. Warren
    Search
  22. Hart v. Lamphire
    Search
  23. Beaty v. Lessee
    Search
  24. Page 278 U. S. 437 The same principle is declared in Fanning v. Gregoire
    Search
  25. How. 524, 57 U. S. 534 , Wright v. Nagle
    Search
  26. U. S. 791 , 101 U. S. 796 , Wheeling & Belmont Bridge Co. v. Wheeling
    Search
  27. Bridge Co., 138 U. S. 287 , 138 U. S. 293 , and Williams v. Wingo
    Search
  28. is only created by clear language, and is not to be extended by implication beyond the terms of the statute. Fanning v. Gregoire
    Search
  29. to be made enlarging his grant, as seems to have been the view of Chancellor Kent in Newburgh & C. Turnpike Co. v. Miller
    Search
  30. franchise should be construed to cover all methods of travel and transportation across the water is rejected in Dyer v. Tuskaloosa
    Search
  31. Piatt v. Covington
    Search
  32. Snidow v. Board
    Search
  33. Dibden v. Skirrow
    Search
  34. Ch. 41. There are many strong dicta to this same effect. Morey v. Orford
    Search
  35. Piscataqua Bridge v. New
    Search
  36. Bush v. Peru
    Search
  37. McPherson Bros. v. Superior
    Search
  38. that a contractual term forbidding a ferry or a toll bridge does not exclude a railroad bridge. Mohawk Bridge Co. v. Utica
    Search
  39. McLeod v. Savannah
    Search
  40. Hopkins v. Great
    Search
  41. Northern Ry., 2 Q.B.D. 224 (1877), overruling Regina v. Cambrian
    Search
  42. Enfield Toll Bridge Co. v. Hartford
    Search
  43. New Haven R. Co., 17 Conn. 40 (1845). There is some conflicting authority on the main question. Gates v. McDaniel
    Search
  44. Norris v. Farmers'
    Search
  45. Menzel Estate Co. v. City
    Search
  46. Blanchard v. Abraham
    Search
  47. or injury to tangible property which affected the decisions. The strongest case for the appellant is Mason v. Harper's
    Search
  48. could take away at any time all the exclusive privileges of the proprietors theretofore existing. In Hopkins v. Great
    Search
  49. U.S. Supreme Court Larson v. South
    Search
  50. Nixon v. Reid
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial