Bassett v. Salisbury Manufacturing Co.
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Case, The writ was dated August 17,1847. The declaration is as follows: In a plea of the case, for that the said Bassett, on the 19th day of April, in the year 1839, was, and ever since has been, lawfully seized and possessed of two certain tracts of peat and meadow land, situate in Kingston, in said county of Rockingham, one tract containing about thirty-three acres, and bounded westerly by land of Capt.
Read the full summary
Case, The writ was dated August 17,1847. The declaration is as follows: In a plea of the case, for that the said Bassett, on the 19th day of April, in the year 1839, was, and ever since has been, lawfully seized and possessed of two certain tracts of peat and meadow land, situate in Kingston, in said county of Rockingham, one tract containing about thirty-three acres, and bounded westerly by land of Capt. Daniel Col-cord, northerly by other land of said Bassett, which he purchased of George W. Prescott, and was formerly owned by-widow Hannah Thayer, easterly by land of Capt. Daniel Colcord,…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
The amendment was objected to because, as it was alleged, it introduced a new cause of action. The substantial grievance alleged in the writ, was the maintaining a dam across the river, to the injury of his meadow above. If the dam, as it was kept up, caused injury to the plaintiff’s land, by keeping the water upon it, it was immaterial whether it was the water of the Powow river, or of the little streams flowing into it, or that falling upon it in rains. The substantial injury, then, being the damage to the land by means of water kept up by the defendant’s dam, the amendment was but a…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Spoor v. Holland & HarlowNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- Baker v. FreemanNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- Hamblett v. HamblettSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
- Lund v. ParkerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1824
- Poole v. SymondsSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1818
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Story v. Concord & Montreal RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1900
- Nutt v. ManchesterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1877