LOUISIANA
v.
MISSISSIPPI ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court confirmed the Special Master's report, establishing the boundary between Louisiana and Mississippi based on the live thalweg of the Mississippi River.
This case involved a dispute between Louisiana and Mississippi over their boundary in the Mississippi River at Deadman's Bend. A Special Master was ap…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Boundary Determination cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam and Decree.
Upon consideration of the Report filed June 7, 1965, by Senior Judge Marvin Jones, Special Master, and the exceptions thereto, it is now adjudged, ordered, and decreed as follows:
(1) All exceptions are overruled and the Report is in all things confirmed.
(2) The true boundary between the States of Louisiana and Mississippi in the area of the Mississippi River known as Deadman’s Bend on the several dates mentioned is determined to be as follows:
At all times the live thalweg has been the true boundary. On October 3, 1952, the live thalweg was a gradually curving line running southward from the foot of Glass-cock Cutoff, and east of the future location of Louisiana State Well No. 1 by 230 feet, to the end of Deadman’s Bend at range 334.5 AHP. This line is described below by latitude and longitude and is drawn on Special Master Exhibit No. 1.
On April 10, 1964, the live thalweg was a gradually curving line running southward from the foot of Glass-cock Cutoff, and west of Louisiana State Well No. 1 by 850 feet, to the end of Deadman’s Bend at range 334.5 AHP. This line is described below by latitude and longitude and is drawn on Special Master Exhibit No. 1.
At all times between October 3, 1952, and April 10, 1964, the live thalweg has moved at a constant rate. The boundary location for any intervening period at any point in Deadman’s Bend (from the foot of Glasscock Cutoff to range 334.5 AHP) is to be determined mathematically by calculating the constant rate of change for that particular place in Deadman’s Bend, using the 1952 and 1964 thalwegs described heretofore and the appropriate time differentials.
At the latitude of Louisiana State Well No. 1 the location of the boundary was as follows from October 3, 1952, to April 10, 1964:
October 3, 1952 ................ 230 feet east of well
April 27, 1954 .................. 80 feet east of well
February 27, 1955.............. Directly above the well
April 10, 1956.................. 102 feet west of well
April 10, 1957.................. 195 feet west of well
April 10, 1958.................. 289 feet west of well
April 10, 1959.................. 382 feet west of well
April 10, 1960.................. 476 feet west of well
April 10, 1961.................. 569 feet west of well
April 10, 1962 .................. 663 feet west of well
April 10, 1963 .................. 756 feet west of well
April 10, 1964.................. 850 feet west of well The Louisiana State Well No. 1 became located inside the boundary of Mississippi on February 28, 1955.
The description of the October 3, 1952, live thalweg by geodetic positions (North American Datum) is as follows:
Beginning at the foot of Glasscock Cutoff at a point on range 338.3 AHP, which is Lat. 31°19'07.0"— Long. 91°30'33.5".
Thence running southward through the following points:
Latitude Longitude
91°30'37.0" 31°18'57.5" 91°30'39.0" 31018'47.5" 91°30'40.0" 31°18'37.0" 91°30'39.5" 3V1&'27.W'
91°30'39.0" 31°18'17.0" 91°30'38.0" 31°18'07.0" 91°30'38.0" 31°17'57.5" 91°30'38.0" 31°17/47.0" 91°30'37.0" 31°17/37.0,/ 91°30'36.5" 31° 17'27.0"
91°30'36.0" 31°17'17.0" 91°30'35.0" 31°17,07.0" 91°30'33.5" 31016'57.5" 91°30'32.5" 31°16'4:7.0"
91°30'34.0" 31°16'42.5" 91°30'37.0" 31°16'38.0" 91°30'43.0" srie^ob" 91°30'51.0" 31°16,22.5,/ 91°31'00.0" 31016'17.0" 9io3i'io.o" 31°16'12.0" 91°31'21.0" 31°16,08.0" 91°31'32.0" 31°16'05.5" 91o31'42.0" 31016'03.5" The description of the April 10, 1964, live thalweg by geodetic positions (North American Datum) is as follows:
Beginning at the foot of Glasscock Cutoff at a point on range 338.3 AHP, which is Lat. 31°19'07.0"— Long. 91°30'38.5". Thence running southward through the following points:
Latitude Longitude
91°30'40.5" 31°18'57.5" 91°30'42.5" 3i°i8'48.o" 91°30'44.0" 31°18'38.0" 91°30'46.0" 31°18'28.0" 91°30'47.0" 3i°i8T8.5" 91°30'48.5" 31°18'08.5" 91°30'50.0" 31°17'59.0" 91°30'52.0" 31°17'49.0" 91°30'52.5" 31°17'39.0" 91°30'52.5" 31°17'29.5" 91°30'52.5" 31°17/20.0'/ 91°30'52.0" 31°17'10.0" 91°30'52.0" 31°17'00.5" 91°30'52.5" 31°16'51.0" 91°30'53.0" 31°16'41.0" 91°30'55.0" 31°16'36.0" 9i°30'58.0" 31°16'32.0" 91°31'04.5" 31°16'24.0" 91°31'11.5" 31°16'16.0" 91°31'18.5" 3i°i6'09.0" 91°31'28.0" 31°16'03.0" 91°31'38.0" 31°15'59.0" (3) As it appears that the Special Master has completed his work, he is hereby discharged with the thanks of the Court.
(4) The costs of this suit are to be equally divided between the two States.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
Schoenbaum v. Bradshaw D. Firstbrook, 405 F.2d 200 (2d Cir. 1968)…f the “Aquitaine directors” on the vote for the sale to Aquitaine is hardly worthy of mention. As I said in my dissenting opinion in Alleghany Corporation v. Kirby, 344 F. 2d 571 (2d Cir. 1965), cert. dismissed as improvidently granted, 384 U.S. 28, 86 S.Ct. 1250, 16 L.Ed.2d 33f (1966):…
-
Gen. Time Corp. v. Talley Indus., Inc., 403 F.2d 159 (2d Cir. 1968)…sed corporate transaction — the situation in jBorah and in Alleghany Corp. v. Kirby, 333 F. 2d 327, 345-346 (2 Cir. 1964), aff’d by an equally divided court in banc, 340 F. 2d 311 (2 Cir. 1965), cert. dismissed as improvidently granted, 384 U.S. 28, 86 S.Ct. 1250, 16 L.Ed.2d 335 (1966). No one knows just what motivates stockholders in choosing between slates. Those experienced in contested elections are likely to doubt whether proxy statements are read with much precision, and determination of the influenc…
-
Romasanta v. United Airlines, Inc., 537 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1976)…ng as his interests are being protected by his class representatives. In Alleghany Corporation v. Kirby, 344 F. 2d 571 (2d Cir. 1965), cert. granted, 381 U.S. 933, 85 S.Ct. 1772, 14 L.Ed.2d 698, cert. dismissed as improvidently granted, 384 U.S. 28, 86 S.Ct. 1250, 16 L.Ed.2d 345 (1966), where the Second Circuit denied a “last-minute” attempt at intervention by shareholders in a derivative suit to set aside a settlement on behalf of their corporation, the court explained the connection between timeliness and…
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence