drainage district
Defined in 3 dictionaries — Case Law, Cyclopedic (1922), Bouvier (1914)
Definitions from Case Law
From 239 U.S. 478 - Myles Salt Company v. Board of Commissioners of the Iberia & St Mary Drainage District · 1916Most cited · 327 citing opinions
A drainage district has the special purpose of the improvement of particular property, and when it is so formed to include property which is not and cannot be benefited directly or indirectly, including it only that it may pay for the benefit to other property, there is an abuse of power and an act of confiscation.
The Cyclopedic Law Dictionary
Walter A. Shumaker and George Foster Longsdorf; ed. James C. Cahill · 1922
A local subdivision of the state created by law for the purpose of administering therein certain functions of local government. 240 111. 199.
Bouvier's Law Dictionary and Concise Encyclopedia
John Bouvier; revised by Francis Rawle · 1914
The organization of a drainage district is within the power of the state; Hagar v. Reclamation Dist* within the district; Commissioners of Union Drainage Dist No. 3 v. Com'rs, 220 111. 176, 77 N. E. 71; and the lands within the district may be assessed to pay the entire cost, on the theory that they alone are benefited; Bradbury v. Drainage Dist, 236 111. 36, 86 N. E. 163, 19 L R. A. (N. S.) 991, 15 Ann. Cas. 904. It is correct to say that a drainage district is a quasi-corporation, if the act under which it is organized does not make it a corporation in fact; but it is not created for political purposes or for the administration of civil government. It is not liable for the unauthorized acts of its commissioners, but the district has the power of eminent domain for the purposes of its organization; Bradbury v. Drainage Dist, 236 111. 36, 86 N. E. 163, 19 L. R. A. (N. S.) 991, 15 Ann. Cas. 904. They have been classed as municipal corporations; Commissioners of Havana Tp. Drainage Dist. No. 1 v. Kelsey, 120 111. 4S2, 11 N. E. 256. Where, in the construction of a levee, an upper owner was damaged by having the water thrown back on his lands, and there was no negligence on the part of the district in the performance of the work, he could not recover; Bradbury v. Drainage Dist., 236 111. 36, 86 N. E. 163, 19 L. R. A. (N. S.) 991, 15 Ann. Cas. 904; Lamb v. Reclamation Dist., 73 Cal. 125, 14 Pac. 625, 2 Am. St Rep. 775 (where a lower owner was damaged by overflow, caused by the necessary work of a reclamation district). See Police Powee; Assessment; Rivers.