Pyle v. Gilbert
Georgia Supreme Court
265 S.E.2d 584 (1980)
Willie and Arlene Gilbert (plaintiffs) owned a water-powered gristmill on a non-navigable creek and sued upstream landowner Sanford Hill (defendant) for nuisance and trespass, alleging under the natural-flow theory that Hill's irrigation system unlawfully diverted water from the creek; Hill argued his use was proper agricultural use under the reasonable-use theory. The trial court granted the Gilberts summary judgment, ruling Hill's irrigation was unreasonable and an improper diversion as a matter of law, and Hill appealed.
Whether the right of a lower riparian owner to receive the natural flow of water without diversion is subject to the right of an upper riparian owner to make reasonable use of the water.