Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Wick v. Chelan Electric Company

• 1929 • 280 U.S. 108 • Taft Court
In the case of Wick v. Chelan Electric Company, 1929, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Chelan Electric Company. The dispute arose when Wick, a landowner whose property was adjacent to Lake Chelan in Washington State, sued the electric company for raising the water level of the lake due to its dam construction which resulted in flooding and damage to his property. He sought compensation for damages and an injunction against further flooding. However, it was found that under federal law at...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Taft Court
Term: 1929
Docket: 29
280 U.S. 108
50 S. Ct. 41
74 L. Ed. 212
1929 U.S. LEXIS 452
Argued: Nov 01, 1929

Wick v. Chelan Electric Company

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Wick v. Chelan Electric Company, 1929, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Chelan Electric Company. The dispute arose when Wick, a landowner whose property was adjacent to Lake Chelan in Washington State, sued the electric company for raising the water level of the lake due to its dam construction which resulted in flooding and damage to his property. He sought compensation for damages and an injunction against further flooding. However, it was found that under federal law at that time (the Federal Water Power Act), only those who owned land up to high-water mark had rights over any changes made by power companies with federally granted licenses - such as building dams or altering water levels - even if these actions caused harm or loss on their properties. Since Wick's ownership did not extend up to this mark but stopped at low-water mark instead; he could not claim damages from alterations above this point according to federal law thus making him ineligible for compensation.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Wick v. Chelan Electric Company, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a Washington state law requiring all electric companies to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity before constructing or operating any line, plant or system went against previous court rulings. The dissenting justices believed this requirement constituted an undue burden on interstate commerce and violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. They contended that while states have authority over local matters, they should not be allowed to regulate activities which are inherently national in scope such as electricity transmission across state lines. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view that there was no discrimination against out-of-state businesses since both in-state and out-of-state companies were subject to same regulations; instead arguing that this regulation disproportionately affected non-local entities seeking entry into Washington’s market thereby creating an unfair barrier to trade.

Opinion written by Justice PButler
Decided: Nov 25, 1929
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms