MISSISSIPPI v. ARKANSAS
No. 48,
Orig.
Decided February 26, 1974
Decree entered February 26, 1974
Amended decree entered December 23, 1974
AMENDED DECREE
It Is Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed as Follows:
. 1. Luna Bar, depicted in Mississippi’s Exhibits 1 and 2, constituting, respectively, Appendix A and part of Appendix B to the Special Master’s report, and appended hereto and hereby made a part of this decree, came into existence by accretion to Carter Point and is, and was, a part of the State of Mississippi.
2. The boundary line between the State of Mississippi and the State of Arkansas in the areas between the upstream and the downstream ends of Tarpley Cut-off is as follows:
“That part of the abandoned bed of the Mississippi River between the upstream end of the Tarpley Cutoff and the downstream end of Tarpley Cut-off as defined and identified in Mississippi’s said Exhibit 2, being a plat prepared by Austin B. Smith. The above described State boundary line being more particularly described as follows, to-wit:
“Beginning at the head of Tarpley Cut-off Channel at Point P-36 as shown on said Smith’s Mississippi Exhibit P-2 at Latitude 33°26,24" and Longitude 91°06'46";
“thence west to Point P-1, Lat. 33°26'25" and Long. 91°07/30";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-2, Lat. 33°26'0.0" and Long. 91°07'56" ;
“thence southwesterly to Point P-3, Lat. 33°25'47" and Long. 91°08'17" ;
“thence southwesterly to Point P-4, Lat. 33°25'40" and Long. 91°08'42";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-5, Lat. 33°25'36" and Long. 91°09'0.0";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-6, Lat. 33°25'30" and Long. 91°09'29";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-7, Lat. 33°25'25" and Long. 91°10'0.0";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-8, Lat. 33°25'21" and Long. 91°10'28";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-9, Lat. 33°25/16" and Long. 91°11'0.0";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-10, Lat. 33°25'10" and Long. 91°11'29";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-11, Lat. 33°25'06" and Long. 91°11'46";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-12, Lat. 33°25'00" and Long. 91°12'04";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-13, Lat. 33°24'52" and Long. 91° 12'17";
“thence southwesterly to Point P-14, Lat. 33°24'46" and Long. 91°12'23";
“thence southward to Point P-15, Lat. 33°24'37" and Long. 91°12'28";
“thence southward to Point P-16, Lat. 33°24'23" and Long. 91° 12'32";
“thence southward to Point P-17, Lat. 33°24'11.5" and Long. 91°12'30";
“thence southeasterly to Point P-18, Lat. 33°24'0.0" and Long. 91°12'21";
“thence southeasterly to Point P-19, Lat. 33°23'44.5" and Long. 91°12'0.0";
“thence southeasterly to Point P-20, Lat. 33°23'37" and Long. 91°11'49.5";
“thence southeasterly to Point P-21, Lat. 33°23'06" and Long. 91°11'0.0";
“thence southeasterly to Point P-22, Lat. 33°23'0.0" and Long. 91°10'48";
“thence southeasterly to Point P-23, Lat. 33°22'54" and Long. 91°10/34";
“thence southeasterly to Point P-24, Lat. 33°22'49" and Long. 91°10'18";
“thence eastward to Point P-25, Lat. 33°22'48" and Long. 91°10'10";
“thence eastward to Point P-26, Lat. 33°22'47" and Long. 91°10'0.0";
“thence eastward to Point P-27, Lat. 33°22'43.5" and Long. 91°09'14.5";
“thence eastward to Point P-28, Lat. 33°22'44" and Long. 91°09'0.0";
“thence northeasterly to Point P-29, Lat. 33°22'46.5" and Long. 91o08'45";
“thence northeasterly to Point P-30, Lat. 33°22'53" and Long. 91°08'24/' ;
“thence northeasterly to Point P-31, Lat. 33°23'0.0" and Long. 91°08'04.5";
“thence northeasterly to Point P-32, Lat. 33°23'01.5" and Long. 91o08'0.0'';
“thence northeasterly to Point P-33, Lat. 33°23,09.5,/ and Long. 91°07'40";
“thence northeasterly to Point P-34, Lat. 33°23r13" and Long. 91°07'31";
“thence northeasterly to Point P-35, Lat. 33°23'25" and Long. 91°06/39,/ at the foot of Tarpley Cut-off Channel”;
3. The costs of this suit, including the expenses of the Special Master and the printing of his report, have been paid out of the fund made up of equal contributions by the State of Mississippi and the State of Arkansas and said fund has been sufficient to defray all said expenses to the date of the issuance of the report. Any costs and expenses that may be incurred beyond the amount so contributed by the respective litigants shall be borne by the State of Arkansas.
What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to determine the bases on which the Supreme Court rested its decision with regard to the legal provision that the Court considered in the case. Consider "judicial review (national level)" if the majority determined the constitutionality of some action taken by some unit or official of the federal government, including an interstate compact. Consider "judicial review (state level)" if the majority determined the constitutionality of some action taken by some unit or official of a state or local government. Consider "statutory construction" for cases where the majority interpret a federal statute, treaty, or court rule; if the Court interprets a federal statute governing the powers or jurisdiction of a federal court; if the Court construes a state law as incompatible with a federal law; or if an administrative official interprets a federal statute. Do not consider "statutory construction" where an administrative agency or official acts "pursuant to" a statute, unless the Court interprets the statute to determine if administrative action is proper. Consider "interpretation of administrative regulation or rule, or executive order" if the majority treats federal administrative action in arriving at its decision.Consider "diversity jurisdiction" if the majority said in approximately so many words that under its diversity jurisdiction it is interpreting state law. Consider "federal common law" if the majority indicate that it used a judge-made "doctrine" or "rule; if the Court without more merely specifies the disposition the Court has made of the case and cites one or more of its own previously decided cases unless the citation is qualified by the word "see."; if the case concerns admiralty or maritime law, or some other aspect of the law of nations other than a treaty; if the case concerns the retroactive application of a constitutional provision or a previous decision of the Court; if the case concerns an exclusionary rule, the harmless error rule (though not the statute), the abstention doctrine, comity, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or if the case concerns a "rule" or "doctrine" that is not specified as related to or connected with a constitutional or statutory provision. Consider "Supreme Court supervision of lower federal or state courts or original jurisdiction" otherwise (i.e., the residual code); for issues pertaining to non-statutorily based Judicial Power topics; for cases arising under the Court's original jurisdiction; in cases in which the Court denied or dismissed the petition for review or where the decision of a lower court is affirmed by a tie vote; or in workers' compensation litigation involving statutory interpretation and, in addition, a discussion of jury determination and/or the sufficiency of the evidence.