Legal Opinion
Turner v. Inhabitants of Gardner
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided October 22, 1913PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C. J.
These are petitions brought by a lower riparian, proprietor upon Otter River, an unnavigable stream, for damages arising from the taking and diversion of the waters of Perley Brook, a tributary confluent to the river above the petitioners’ premises, by the respondent under the authority of St. 1902, c. 287. The question is whether the petitions were brought seasonably. The decision turns upon the construction to be given to several sections of the statute. Section 1 empowers the respondent to “take, by purchase or otherwise, the waters” of any brook within the limits of the town. Section 2…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Gloucester Water Supply Co. v. City of GloucesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
- Ham v. City of SalemMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Appleton v. City of NewtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
- Bailey v. Inhabitants of WoburnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Lund v. City of New BedfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Byfield v. City of NewtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Amory v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
- Opinion of the Justices to the House of RepresentativesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- Radway v. Selectmen of DennisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Del Grosso v. Board of Appeal of RevereMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1953
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.