Davis v. Wilson
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a complaint, under the Rev. Sts. c. 116. The complainant alleged that she was seized in fee of about two acres of land in Shirley, which were overflowed by means of a dam placed by the respondent across Mulpus brook, “ for the purpose of raising a head of water sufficient to work his water-mill there situate; ” and she prayed that a warrant might issue to the sheriff of the county, requiring him to impanel a jury “to ascertain the damages occasioned as aforesaid.”
Read the full summary
This was a complaint, under the Rev. Sts. c. 116. The complainant alleged that she was seized in fee of about two acres of land in Shirley, which were overflowed by means of a dam placed by the respondent across Mulpus brook, “ for the purpose of raising a head of water sufficient to work his water-mill there situate; ” and she prayed that a warrant might issue to the sheriff of the county, requiring him to impanel a jury “to ascertain the damages occasioned as aforesaid.” The respondent filed a specification of defence, wherein he claimed the right to maintain the dam mentioned in the…
1Opinion of the CourtMetcalf, J.
We are all of opinion that the right instructions were given to the jury. The single question in the case was, whether Francis Harris gave to his daughter Hannah, and to her heirs and assigns, a right to overflow, without paying damages, any more of the land, which he had, by a pre*206vious clause in his will, given to his daughter Abigail, and to her heirs and assigns, than was overflowed when the will was made. So far as the complainant’s land was then overflowed, her counsel admit that the respondent may still overflow it, without liability to pay damages: that the devise of the blacksmith…
2Cited by20 opinions
- von Arnim v. American Tube WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- Calkins v. Wire Hardware Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Crumlish's Adm'r v. Cent. Imp. Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1893
- Pew v. First National BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- Bartlett v. Mystic River Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.