It shall be the duty of landowners in this state, or tenants of such landowners when in possession, owning or occupying lands through which a watercourse, slough, drainage ditch or drainage course lies, runs or has its course, to clean such watercourse, slough, drainage ditch or drainage course at least once a year, between March 1 and April 15, of all rubbish, weeds or other substance blocking or otherwise obstructing the flow of the water in such watercourse, slough, drainage ditch or drainage course, whenever such obstruction is caused by any of the acts of said owner or tenant, or with his knowledge or consent; Provided, however, this and sections 31-225 and 31-226 shall not apply to drainage ditches under control of any drainage company or corporation.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases, 1992–2018 · leading case:
Barthel v. Liermann, 509 N.W.2d 660 (Neb. Ct. App. 1993).
Barthel v. Liermann, 509 N.W.2d 660 (Neb. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 15× “The Barthels claim that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 31-224 (Reissue 1988) requires the Liermanns to clean out the ditch.”
Barthel v. Liermann, No. A-12-745 (Neb. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2014).
· cites it 19× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 31-224 (Reissue 2008) imposes upon a landowner the duty to clean a drainage ditch once a year, between March 1 and April 15.”
Gustafson v. Bodlak, No. A-16-1213 (Neb. Ct. App. Dec. 18, 2018).
· cites it 11× “As noted in our summary of the district court’s order, the district court based part of its analysis on § 31-225 rather than § 31-224.”
Hickman v. Hunkins, 489 N.W.2d 316 (Neb. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “Hunkins’ reliance upon Neb. Rev. Stat. § 31-224 (Reissue 1988) is misplaced.”
Belitz v. Belitz, No. A-12-461 (Neb. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2014).
· cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 31-224 (Reissue 2008) imposes upon a landowner the duty to clean a drainage ditch once a year, between March 1 and April 15.”
Thurston v. Nelson, No. A-13-056 (Neb. Ct. App. Feb. 4, 2014).
“CONCLUSION Having determined that the district court properly con- strued § 31-224 and did not err when finding the Liermanns had complied with this section, we affirm the district court’s judgment.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.