State v. Adams
| Decision Date | 28 June 1957 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 36844--36849,s. 36844--36849 |
| Citation | 89 N.W.2d 661,251 Minn. 521 |
| Parties | STATE of Minnesota, Appellant, v. Robert Morford ADAMS et al. STATE of Minnesota, Appellant, v. The ADAMS CORPORATION et al., Respondents. STATE of Minnesota, Appellant, v. ADAMS HOLDING COMPANY et al., Respondents. STATE of Minnesota, Appellant, v. Byron H. COOLIDGE et al., Respondents. STATE of Minnesota, Appellant, v. The ADAMS CORPORATION et al., Respondents. STATE of Minnesota, Appellant, v. Robert M. ADAMS et al., Respondents. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
1. In reviewing findings of fact, the rule in this state, prior to the adoption of Rule 52.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, has been that findings must be upheld if
they are reasonably sustained in the light of the evidence as a whole, and the new rule, although differently worded, makes no practical change in the method of review nor was one intended.
2. The ownership of the beds of navigable waters was granted to the State of Minnesota upon its admission to the Union on May 11, 1858.
3. Question of navigability is to be determined by Federal law.
4. The Federal rule is that streams which are navigable in fact are navigable in law; that they are navigable in fact when they are used or are susceptible of use in their ordinary and natural condition as highways for commerce; that ordinary and natural conditions refer to volume of water, the gradients, and the regularity of flow; and that a waterway otherwise suitable for navigation is not barred from that classification merely because artificial aids must make the highway suitable for use before commercial navigation may be undertaken.
5. Under the facts in this case, viewed in the light of the Federal test of navigability, the Rabbit River watercourse was not navigable at the time Minnesota was admitted to the Union; therefore the ownership of the stream bed is not in the state.
6. Under the facts in this case, viewed in the light of the Federal test of navigability, Rabbit Lake was not navigable at the time Minnesota was admitted to the Union; therefore the ownership of the lake bed is not in the state.
7. The susceptibility of a lake for use as a highway for useful commerce is determined mainly by two factors: (1) Whether the body of water has physical characteristics which permit and are conducive to water commerce; and (2) whether the body of water is situated in a location useful to commercial trade or travel.
8. Prior proceedings relating to the use of the waters of Rabbit Lake are not res judicata here and do not create an estoppel as against any defendant.
Miles Lord, Atty. Gen., Victor J. Michaelson, and Sydney, Berde, Sp. Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellant.
Best, Flanagan, Rogers, Lewis & Simonet, Minneapolis, Fryberger, Fulton & Boyle, Duluth, L. B. daPonte and H. B. Krengel, St. Paul, Dancer, Montague, Applequist, Lyons, Nolan & Nordine, Duluth, Reavill, Jensvold, Neimeyer & Johnson, Duluth, Cant, Taylor, Haverstock, Beardsley & Gray, Minneapolis, Murphy & Cook, Crosby, Arthur Roberts, Duluth, H. A. McLaughlin, Ironton, Ryan, Ryan & Ebert, Brainerd, Joseph W. Ryan, Aitkin, Nye, Montague, Sullivan & McMillan, Duluth, S. G. Fitzpatrick, Brainerd, Leonard, Street & Deinard, Minneapolis, Todd, McCloud & Mackey, St. Paul, Berryman & Allard, St. Paul, Briggs, Gilbert, Morton, Kyle & Macartney, St. Paul, Jensvold, Butchart & Dahle, Duluth, Hoffmann, Donahue & Graff, St. Paul, A. H. Markert, St. Paul, Raymond J. Rockstroh, St. Paul, Richards, Janes, Hoke, Montgomery & Cobb, Minneapolis, for respondents.
Miles Lord, Atty. Gen., Melvin J. Peterson, Deputy Atty. Gen., for Commissioner of Conservation George A. Selke, Harry H. Peterson, Minneapolis, Chester S. Wilson, Stillwater, amici curiae.
MAGNEY, Commissioner.
Six actions were brought by the State of Minnesota to determine adverse claims to the beds of certain lakes and connecting streams in Crow Wing County. The state alleged that it was the owner in fee simple of the lands constituting the beds of these lakes and streams. The riparian owners answered and alleged that, since the waters involved were nonnavigable, they were the owners in fee simple of the beds of these waters. The actions were consolidated for trial. By stipulation, the court limited the issue for determination to the navigability of the waters involved, leaving for future determination the boundary lines between lake and stream beds and riparian lands. The importance of these cases lies in the fact that the lake and stream beds involved are underlaid with valuable iron ore deposits. The court found all the lakes and streams involved nonnavigable waters and the title to the beds therefore in the riparian owners, except in the case of Little Rabbit Lake and the channel between it and the Mississippi River (case No. 36,848). Appeals were taken by the state from the orders of the court denying its motions for orders amending the findings of fact and conclusions of law or granting new trials.
The record is voluminous and the facts numerous. Because of the importance of this litigation, it has been deemed desirable and probably necessary to set out the facts more in detail than in the average case, with the hope, also, that such procedure will present as clear a picture of the situation as it is possible to do in words.
1. In State, by Burnquist, v. Bollenbach, 241 Minn. 103, 109, 63 N.W.2d 278, 283, we said:
As the questions raised by the state in these appeals involve the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the findings of the court, we must review the record with the above rule in mind.
2. The ownership of the beds of navigable waters was granted to the State of Minnesota upon its admission to the Union on May 11, 1858. The title to all other lake and stream beds remained in the Federal government. State v. Longyear Holding Co., 224 Minn. 451, 29 N.W.2d 657; Bingenheimer v. Diamond Iron Min. Co., 237 Minn. 332, 54 N.W.2d 912; State, by Burnquist, v. Bollenbach, 241 Minn. 103, 63 N.W.2d 278.
3. The question of navigability is to be determined by Federal law. As stated in United States v. Holt State Bank, 270 U.S. 49, 55, 46 S.Ct. 197, 199, 70 L.Ed. 465, 469:
'* * * Navigability, when asserted as the basis of a right arising under the Constitution of the United States, is necessarily a question of federal law to be determined according to the general rule recognized and applied in the federal courts.'
The Minnesota cases above cited recognized and applied this rule.
4. In Bingenheimer v. Diamond Iron Min. Co. supra, we reviewed quite fully the Federal cases which have considered the question of navigability. It would therefore seem unnecessary to do so again. After such a review, we stated that, under the Federal decisions as we understood them, the rule is that streams or lakes which are navigable in fact are navigable in law; that they are navigable in fact when they are used, or are susceptible of use, in their ordinary and natural condition, as highways for commerce; that ordinary and natural conditions refer to volume of water, the gradients, and the regularity of flow; and that a waterway otherwise suitable for navigation is not barred from that classification merely because artificial aids must make the highway suitable for use before commercial navigation may be undertaken. Before applying this test, we must determine what the facts are to which the test must be applied.
5. The Rabbit Lake chain of lakes and streams, also called the Rabbit Lake basin, extends generally in a southwesterly and northeasterly direction, a short distance east of the Mississippi River and some miles to the north of the city of Brainerd. It is about 10 miles in length. At the top of the chain (the north end) lies Rabbit Lake, the largest body of water involved. It has an area of 1,160 acres and consists of 2 so-called bowls, connected by a channel about 700 feet wide and 12 to 15 feet deep. The depth of the lake varies from 0 to 40 feet. Below Rabbit Lake is Clinker Lake, which has an area of 96 acres and a depth of from 0 to 35 feet. Between Rabbit and Clinker is a channel or stream about 500 feet long. Below Clinker is Curley or Turner Lake. We shall refer to it hereafter as Turner Lake. It has an area of 64 acres and a depth of from 0 to 36 feet. Between Clinker and Turner is a connecting stream about one-half mile long. Below Turner lies Mahnomen Lake, the next largest lake, with an area of about 400 acres and from 0 to 25 feet deep. Between Turner and Mahnomen is a stream also about half a mile in length. Below Mahnomen is Pascoe Lake, with an area of 64 acres and from 0 to 15 feet deep. Between Mahnomen and Pascoe is a connecting stream about 800 feet in length. Below Pascoe is Little Rabbit Lake, with an area of 179 acres and a depth of from 0 to 30 feet. Between Pascoe and Little Rabbit is a connecting stream about 1.7 miles in length. At the lower end of Little Rabbit is an outlet stream, about 800 feet in length, which empties into the Mississippi River. The stream connections are called Rabbit River.
Besides the lakes and streams in the above chain, there are several lakes and streams that enter into the picture. Again, commencing at the upper end, we find a small lake, called Carlson Lake, which lies a short distance east of Rabbit Lake. A...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Defenders of Wildlife v. Hull
...then cite to Lykes, 821 F.Supp. at 1463, Taylor Fishing Club v. Hammett, 88 S.W.2d 127 (Tex.Civ.App.1935), and State v. Adams, 251 Minn. 521, 89 N.W.2d 661 (1958), to support this ¶ 33 As already acknowledged, Lykes can be distinguished because it is a case that discusses navigability in th......
-
Bott v. Commission of Natural Resources of State of Mich. Dept. of Natural Resources
...logs); Willow River Club v. Wade, 100 Wis. 86, 76 N.W. 273 (1898) (river 200 feet wide and 8 to 10 feet deep).35 See State v. Adams, 251 Minn. 521, 557, 89 N.W.2d 661 (1957); State v. Bollenbach, 241 Minn. 103, 118, 63 N.W.2d 278 (1954).In Lamprey, pp. 198, 200, 53 N.W. 1139, the Court held......
-
Parks v. Cooper
...to control waters." North Dakota State Water Comm'n v. Board of Managers, 332 N.W.2d 254, 258 (N.D.1983) (quoting State v. Adams, 251 Minn. 521, 89 N.W.2d 661, 678 (1957), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 826, 79 S.Ct. 45, 3 L.Ed.2d 67 (1958)) (emphasis [¶ 36.] In giving paramount importance to the p......
-
Youngstown Mines Corp. v. Prout
...such reformation was simply to change the agreed-upon depository without affecting any right or title to the payments. 2. State v. Adams, 251 Minn. 521, 89 N.W.2d 661, certiorari denied, 358 U.S. 826, 79 S.Ct. 45, 3 L.Ed.2d 67, which established fee simple title to the bed of Rabbit Lake to......