Source: https://collections.lib.utah.edu/details?id=1139146
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 10:52:34+00:00

Document:
764 not attach but which are subject to appropriation; that grantees of public land granted prior to the enactment of the appropriation act of 1889 had become invested with riparian rights in the waters of streams to which the lands were riparian; and that the appropriation acts of 1889 and following years down to and including the act of 1917 (the extant statute) were valid insofar as they authorized the appropriation of storm and flood waters and other waters without violation of existing riparian rights. A section of the statute provides that an appropriator, after three years' use of water under his statutory appropriation, shall be deemed to have acquired a title by limitation against other claimants including riparian owners;382 but the Texas Court of Civil Appeals has held that this section is not operative as against the rights of riparian landowners.333 Various features of the riparian doctrine have been involved in other decisions of the Texas courts.834 The water appropriation statute includes the underflow of streams among waters subject to appropriation,335 and the supreme court has stated that riparian waters include the underflow of streams.336 The few court decisions relating to percolating waters have recognized the principle that such waters are the property of the owner of the overlying 332 Tex. Vernon's Ann. Civ. Stats., art. 7592. assFreeland v. Peltier, 44 S. W. (2d) 404, 407-408 (Tex. Civ. App. 1931). S3i Navigable waters: Barrett v. Metcalfe, 12 Tex. Civ. App. 247, 254, 33 S. W. 758 (1896); Bigham Bros. v. Port Arthur Canal & Dock Co., 91 S. W. 848, 852-853 (Tex. Civ. App. 1905); Motl v. Boyd, 116 Tex. 82, 111, 286 S. W. 458 (1926). Spring source of watercourse: Fleming v. Davis, 37 Tex. 173, 194-195 (1872); Watkins Land Co. v. Clements, 98 Tex. 578, 584-585, 86 S. W. 733 (1905). Limits of riparian land: Watkins Land Co. v. Clements, 98 Tex. 578, 585, 86 S. W. 733 (1905); Matagorda Canal Co. v. Markham Irr. Co., 154 S. W. 1176, 1180 (Tex. Civ. App. 1913). Use of water by riparian owner on nonriparian land: Watkins Land Co. v. Clements, 98 Tex. 578, 585, 86 S. W. 733 (1905); Humphreys-Mexia Co. v. Arsenaux, 116 Tex. 603, 610, 297 S. W. 225 (1927); Texas Co. v. Burkett, 117 Tex. 16, 25-26, 296 S. W. 273 (1927); Fort Quitman Land Co. v. Mier, 211 S.W. (2d) 340,344 (Tex. Civ. App. 1948). Storage of water: Stacy v. Delery, 57 Tex. Civ. App. 242, 248, 122 S. W. 300 (1909); Chicago, R. I. & Gulf Ry. v. Tarrant County W. C. & I. Dist No. 1, 123 Tex. 432, 448, 73 S.W. (2d) 55 (1934). Appropriation of unappropriated water by riparian owner: Motl v. Boyd, 116 Tex. 82,124, 286 S. W. 458 (1926). City as riparian proprietor: Grogan v. Brownwood, 214 S. W. 532, 536-538 (Tex. Civ. App. 1919). Prescription by riparian owner against downstream riparian owner: Martin v. Burr, 111 Tex. 57,65-67, 228 S. W. 543 (1921). Loss of riparian right: Baker v. Brown, 55 Tex. 377, 381 (1881); Freeland v. Peltier, 44 S. W. (2d) 404,409 (Tex. Civ. App. 1931). 835 Tex. Vernon's Ann. Civ. Stats., art. 7467. 836 Motl v. Boyd, 116 Tex. 82, 111, 286 S. W. 458 (1926); Texas Co. v. Burkett, 117 Tex. 16,28, 296 S.W. 273 (1927).

References: art. 7592
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 art. 7467
 v. 
 v.