Mississippi v. Arkansas

Background

The dispute involved the States of Mississippi and Arkansas over Luna Bar and the boundary in the area of Tarpley Cut-off. Luna Bar appears in Mississippi’s Exhibits 1 and 2 and in the Special Master’s report attached to the decree. The court record states Luna Bar came into existence by accretion to Carter Point and that it "is, and was, a part of the State of Mississippi." The parties also contested the precise location of the boundary between the two States in the abandoned bed of the Mississippi River at Tarpley Cut-off.

Reasoning

The Court described the boundary line as running in the abandoned bed of the Mississippi River between the upstream and downstream ends of Tarpley Cut-off, using the definition and identification shown in Mississippi’s Exhibit 2. The courses and distances of that boundary are set out in Exhibit 2, which the decree adopts. The decree incorporates the Special Master’s report and Mississippi’s exhibits as part of the court’s order. The decree also records how the litigation costs were handled: expenses to date were paid from a fund made by equal contributions from both States.

Real world impact

As ordered, Luna Bar is part of Mississippi, so Mississippi’s authority and control apply there. The boundary location for the Tarpley Cut-off area is fixed by the court using Exhibit 2, providing an official line for governance and land questions. Both States shared the suit costs so far, but the decree assigns any costs beyond the contributed fund to Arkansas.