Anthony v. Lawhorne
Supreme Court of Virginia
Lawhorne made application to the county court of Bed-ford, for leave to erect a water grist mill on Back- Creek in that county, he owning the land on both sides of the stream. The county court awarded him a writ of ad quod damnum.
Read the full summary
Lawhorne made application to the county court of Bed-ford, for leave to erect a water grist mill on Back- Creek in that county, he owning the land on both sides of the stream. The county court awarded him a writ of ad quod damnum. The jury, in their inquest, found, that about three acres of land, in the possession of Anthony and Lancaster, which they purchased jointly of the representatives of William the n Leftwich, would be overflowed by raising tire dam proposed by Lawhorne nineteen feet high; and assessed the value-thereof to 35 dollars. The writ and inquest being returned, county court…
1Opinion of the CourtGreen, J.
The only question upon the merits, is, Whether it was competent to the court, in this collateral way, to decide upon the question of title between the parties, and, in consequence of deciding that the land in question belonged to the applicant, to give him leave to build the mill without paying the damages assessed by the jury ?
This, I think, is decided clearly by the terms of the statute (2 Rev. Code, c. 235), which provides, that when one owning the lands on both sides of a stream, wishes to build a mill, he shall, without any previous notice to the owners of the land above or below, apply…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Keystone Bridge Co. v. SummersWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1878
- Welch v. County Court of Wetzel CountyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1886
- Steed v. BakerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1855
- Calhoun v. PalmerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1851
- Calhoun v. PalmerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1851
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.