In the case of Metropolitan Water Company v. Kaw Valley Drainage District of Wyandotte County, Kansas (1911), the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Kaw Valley Drainage District. The dispute arose when Metropolitan Water Company claimed that a drainage project undertaken by Kaw Valley would damage its water supply system and sought an injunction to halt it. However, the court held that since both entities were public service corporations created under state law for public purposes, they had equal rights and obligations towards serving their respective communities' needs. Therefore, one could not prevent another from performing its duties unless there was clear evidence of irreparable harm or violation of legal rights - which was not proven in this case.

In the dissenting opinion for Metropolitan Water Company v. Kaw Valley Drainage District of Wyandotte County, Kansas, the justice argued that the majority's decision was based on a misinterpretation of both state law and constitutional principles. The justice contended that under Kansas law, drainage districts were not empowered to levy assessments against public utilities like water companies without providing just compensation or due process. Furthermore, he asserted that such levies constituted an unconstitutional taking of private property for public use without fair compensation as required by the Fifth Amendment. He also disagreed with the majority's view that this case involved a simple tax dispute rather than a constitutional issue about property rights and governmental power. In his view, allowing drainage districts to impose arbitrary charges on utility companies could lead to abuse and unfairness in taxation policies.