PAGE Stein v. Phillips, 47 Or. 545, cited... T Tallmadge v. Hooper, 37 Or. 503, cited (in Dis. Opn.). 472 471 290 608 629 607 .14, 163 599 608 154 Thurbur v. McMinnville, 63 Or. 410, distinguished. Vanyi v. Portland Flouring Mills Co., 63 Or. 520, 530, cited. Voorhees v. Geiser-Hendryx Inv. Co., 52 Or. 602, 605, cited. 442 Watson v. Noonday Mining Co., 37 Or. 288, distinguished. 219 Weidert v. State Ins. Co., 19 Or. 261, cited (in Dis. Opn.) 608 Weishaar v. Pendleton, 73 Or. 190, cited.. 83 West v. Eley, 39 Or. 461, cited.... 557 West v. Washington Ry. Co., 49 Or. 436, cited. Williams v. Mt. Hood Ry. Co., 57 Or. 251 (in Dis. Opn.), cited... 608 Willis v. Holmes, 28 Or. 265, approved... Wilson v. McCarthy, 66 Or. 498, cited. Wilson v. Wilson, 26 Or. 251, cited (in Dis. Opn.) Woods v. Town of Prineville, 19 Or. 108, 110, applied.. Wright & Jones v. Edwards, 10 Or. 298, cited and applied 255, distinguished 258, cited.. 163 114 606 .5, 619 5 431 259 Y Yuen Suey v. Fleshman, 65 Or. 606, approved 463, cited.......... 618 Ꮓ Zeuske v. Zeuske, 55 Or. 65, cited..... Zeuske v. Zeuske, 62 Or. 46, cited.. 5 342 ....188, 190, 267, 268, 269, 271, 272, 531, 532, 534, 538, 538 RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT. Cited and Applied in this Volume. 1887, Act Feb. 4, c. 104, 24 Stat. 379 17, 26 U. S. REVISED STATUTES. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OREGON. Argued October 8, reversed October 22, 1915. (152 Pac. 268.) Injunction Jurisdiction-Adequate Remedy at Law-Title to Land. 1. Equity will take jurisdiction of a suit to prevent the defendant from constructing a log boom, by driving piles along the harbor line directly in front of tide-lands alleged to be owned by complainants, and thence across the lands, isolating them from the navigable channel, and preventing ingress and egress to complainants' other property, to their irreparable injury, and threatening to fill the boom with sawlogs, even though defendant denied the alleged ownership, since the ownership, as to which an action of ejectment might have afforded an adequate remedy at law, was not the only question involved, but was ancillary to other questions of access, etc. [As to what is within the meaning of the law of irreparable injury, see note in 1 Am. St. Rep. 374.] Navigable Waters-Log Boom-Pleading-Federal Authority. 2. Where defendant, while denying complainants' ownership, did not affirmatively plead title to the lands in question, and alleged that the boom was situated upon its own land and the waters of the river and bay, and was maintained under license from the federal government, without setting out the terms of such license, it could not be presumed that it empowered defendant to prevent the tide-water owner from access to navigable waters in front of his land. Navigable Waters-State Tide-lands Title Low-water Mark. 3. Deeds conveying all the tide-lands in front of the lots mentioned therein extended the title thereunder to low-water mark, wherever that might be, then or afterward. Navigable Waters Tide-lands-Accretion. 4. The purchaser of tide-water lands, taking to low-water mark, acquires title to accretions gradually forming upon his original grant. [As to acquisition of title to land under water by possession adverse to state, see note in Ann. Cas. 1912A, 702.] |