Spanovich v. Dinert

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that the creation of a seawall and park that cut off the landowner’s riparian rights “was for the improvement of navigation,” because the seawall and park were “natural, if not necessary incidents” related to maintaining the necessary water level
• “The right of the Legislature in these particulars has been treated as paramount to all private rights, and subject only to the power of the Government of the United States to act in the interest of interstate or foreign commerce”
• ‘The waters and the land under [waters] beyond the line of private ownership are held by the State, both as owner of the fee and as the repository of sovereign power, with a perfect right of control in the interest of the public’
• “The waters and the land under [waters] beyond the line of private ownership are held by the State, both as owner of the fee and as the repository of sovereign power, with a perfect right of control in the interest of the public”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).