Chandler v. Duane
New York Supreme Court
This was a motion for costs to the defendants, in an action on the case for overflowing the lands of the plaintiff, in which the plaintiff obtained a verdict for $50. On the trial of the cause, the defendants insisted on a right to erect and keep up on their own land a dam, by which the lands of the plaintiff were overflowed, by virtue of a parol license from the plaintiff and the right thus claimed was in question on the trial. insisted that the case of Otis v. Hall, 3…
Read the full summary
This was a motion for costs to the defendants, in an action on the case for overflowing the lands of the plaintiff, in which the plaintiff obtained a verdict for $50. On the trial of the cause, the defendants insisted on a right to erect and keep up on their own land a dam, by which the lands of the plaintiff were overflowed, by virtue of a parol license from the plaintiff and the right thus claimed was in question on the trial. insisted that the case of Otis v. Hall, 3 Johns. R. 450, was directly in point to show that the defendants, and not the plaintiff, were entitled to costs. They…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sutherland, J.
The case of Otis v. Hall, 3 Johns. R. 450, is an express adjudication upon the precise point presented in this case. The action, and the ground of defence, and all the circumstances in that case, were precisely the same as in this ; and it was there held that the setting up of a parol license from the plaintiff to overflow his land by means of a mill dam erected upon the defendant’s own land, did not bring the freehold or title to land in question, so as to entitle the plaintiff to costs under the statute, upon a recovery of less than $50. The court say there was no…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Rathbone v. . McConnellNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Rathbone v. McConnellNew York Supreme Court · 1855
- Burnet v. KellyNew York Supreme Court · 1854
- Muller v. BayardThe Superior Court of New York City · 1863