Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • The State of Louisiana v. The State of Mississippi, 283 U.S. 791 (1931)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    15 views3 pages
    The Supreme Court approved a special master's report in a boundary dispute between Louisiana and Mississippi. The Court ruled Louisiana was entitled to relief and approved the master's findings. It appointed a commissioner to survey and mark the boundary between the two states according to the definition in the ruling, and ordered costs to be paid by Mississippi up to the date of the decree and future costs to be split evenly.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1931-05-18 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 283 U.S. 791 Docket: 8

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    COURT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court approved a special master's report in a boundary dispute between Louisiana and Mississippi. The Court ruled Louisiana was entitled to relief and approved the master's findings. It appointed a commissioner to survey and mark the boundary between the two states according to the definition in the ruling, and ordered costs to be paid by Mississippi up to the date of the decree and future costs to be split evenly.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as COURT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as court, pdf, or txt
    15 views3 pages

    The State of Louisiana v. The State of Mississippi, 283 U.S. 791 (1931)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The Supreme Court approved a special master's report in a boundary dispute between Louisiana and Mississippi. The Court ruled Louisiana was entitled to relief and approved the master's findings. It appointed a commissioner to survey and mark the boundary between the two states according to the definition in the ruling, and ordered costs to be paid by Mississippi up to the date of the decree and future costs to be split evenly.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as COURT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as court, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    283 U.S.

    791
    51 S.Ct. 369
    75 L.Ed. 1417

    The STATE OF LOUISIANA, Complainant,


    v.
    The STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Defendant.
    No. 8.

    Supreme Court of the United States


    April 13, 1931

    Messrs. Gerard Brandon, of Natchez, Miss., John Dale, of Vidalia, La.,


    Robert Ash, of Washington, D. C., and Percy Saint, of New Orleans, La.,
    for complainant.
    Messrs. H. H. Creekmore, Rufus Creekmore, Rush H. Knox, and Elmer
    C. Sharp, all of , Miss., for defendant.
    PER CURIAM.

    This cause coming on for hearing by this Court upon the report of Thomas G.
    Haight, special master appointed by this Court, and herein filed, and upon the
    exceptions filed herein by the state of Mississippi, defendant, to said report of
    the special master, including the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and
    recommendations for a decree, and also upon all pleadings and exhibits thereto
    heretofore filed by both complainant and defendant, and also upon all
    depositions of witnesses and documentary and record evidence adduced,
    preferred, filed, and submitted both by complainant and defendant and upon all
    briefs of counsel both for complainant and defendant heretofore filed and
    submitted, and thereupon, on February 2, A. D. 1931, this Court having
    rendered of the special master, and directing that a decree should be entered as
    recommended by the special master, and the Court being fully advised in the
    premises:

    It is thereupon considered, and now ordered, adjudged, and decreed by this


    Court, as follws, to wit:

    1. That the bill of complaint has been sustained by sufficient and legal
    evidence, and that complainant, the state of Louisiana, is at law and in equity
    entitled to the relief prayed for.

    2. That the report of Thomas G. Haight, special master, be and the same is
    hereby approved, sustained, and confirmed by this Court, and that the
    exceptions to said report filed by the state of Mississippi be and the same are
    hereby overruled.

    3. That immediately prior to the avulsion of 1912-13 the boundary line between
    the state of Louisiana and the state of Mississippi between latitude 32 39 on the
    north and the division line between Issaquena and Warren counties, Miss. (as
    extended westward), on the south, was at the place and line which was the
    thread of the main channel of the Mississippi river as it then ran; and that, the
    current having since ceased to flow in part of said channel as it existed prior to
    said avulsion, because of the new channel produced thereby, at this time the
    true boundary line between the state of Louisiana and the state of Mississippi,
    in that part and so much of the above area as was affected by the avulsion
    (between said north and south points), is the middle of the navigable channel of
    the Mississippi river as said channel was located at the time when the current
    ceased to flow therein because of the new channel produced by the avulsion of
    1912-13.

    4. That Samuel S. Gannett, geodetic and astronomic engineer, of Washington,


    D. C., is hereby named and appointed as commissioner, with power, authority,
    and inpermanent boundary markers said boundary line, as above defined, by the
    use of the most accurate method now known to science and applicable in that
    locality, between said states between said north and south points, and to make
    and file in this Court, as soon as practicable, a full and accurate report of his
    findings, survey, and plat, and that the same be submitted to this Court for
    confirmation. And he shall file with his report the field notes of his survey,
    showing the method used by him in ascertaining and locating the line of the
    boundary, and a map showing the boundary line as run and marked by him; also
    ten copies of his report and map. Said line, when ascertained and located in
    accordance with this decree and approved and confirmed by the Court, is the
    boundary line between the state of Louisiana and the state of Mississippi
    between the north and south points hereinabove mentioned.

    5. Before entering upon his work, the commissioner shall take and subscribe
    his oath to perform his duties faithfully and impartially. He shall prosecute the
    work with diligence and dispatch, and shall have authority to employ such
    assistants as may be needed therein; and he shall include in his report a

    statement of the work done, the time employed, and the expenses incurred.
    8

    6. The work of the commissioner shall be subject in all its parts to the approval
    of the Court. One copy each of the commissioner's report and map shall be
    promptly transmitted by the clerk to the Governors of the two states; and
    exceptions or objections to the commissioner's report, if there be such, shall be
    presented to the Court, or, if it be not in session, filed with the clerk, within
    forty days after the report is filed.

    7. That the sum to be allowed the commissioner hereby appointed, in payment


    of his services and reimbursement of his expenses, shall be fixed and allowed
    after the submission to this Court and confirmation by it of his report, findings,
    survey and plat.

    10

    8. If, for any reason, there occurs a vacancy in the commission when the Court
    is designation of a new commissioner by the Chief Justice.

    11

    9. That there is allowed and awarded to Thomas G. Haight, special master, the
    sum of $2,500 for services performed as such special master, and the sum of
    $281.56 for expenditures and disbursements by him as such special master in
    the performance of his duties.

    12

    10. That all costs incurred in this suit by not in session, he same may be filled
    by the both complainant and defendant to and including the date of the
    rendition of this decree be and the same are hereby taxed and charged against
    the defendant, state of Mississippi, and are ordered and decreed to be paid by
    the state of Mississippi; that the costs and expenses that may hereafter be
    incurred and allowed by this Court in the ascertaining, marking, surveying, and
    platting of the interstate boundary line by the commissioner, in pursuance of
    this decree, be and the same are hereby ordered and decreed to be paid one-half
    by complainant and one-half by defendant.

    You might also like