Watuppa Reservoir Co. v. City of Fall River
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Petitions for the assessment of damages for the taking of water by the respondent. Trial in the Superior Court, before Oolburn, J., who ruled, as matter of law, upon agreed facts on which the cases were submitted, that each petitioner was entitled to recover a certain sum; and directed verdicts accordingly. The respondent alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, C. J.
The St. of 1871, c. 183, authorized the city of Fall River to take the waters of the North Watuppa Pond, or any part of them, for the purpose of supplying its inhabitants with pure water. Under the authority of this statute, the city in 1873 passed ah order taking one and a half million gallons per day- of the waters of the pond.
Section 10 of the act provides that “the city of Fall River shall be liable to pay all damages that shall be sustained by any person or persons in their property by the taking respectively of the entire waters of said North Watuppa Pond, or by the taking of any less…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bailey v. Inhabitants of WoburnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Mills v. County CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
3Cited by10 opinions
- McGinty v. Athol Reservoir Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Watuppa Reservoir Co. v. City of Fall RiverMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Proprietors of Mills on Monatiquot River v. Inhabitants of Randolph, Holbrook, & BraintreeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Trowbridge v. Inhabitants of BrooklineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Brickett v. Haverhill Aqueduct Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.