Middlebury Electric Co. v. Tupper
Supreme Court of Vermont
Chancery. Heard upon pleadings and master’s report at the December Term, 1897, Addison County, before Munson, Chancellor, whose decree limited the recovery against the defendant Tupper to one-fifth of four hundred dollars. The orator appealed. cited Kidder y. Rixford, 16 Vt. 169; Sanborn y. Braley, 47 Vt. 170; Farrand y. Gleason, 56 Vt. 633; Webb v. Laird, 59 Vt. 108: 62 Vt. 448; Lamson y. Worcester, 58 Vt. 381; 4 Kent’s Com. 370; 1 Wash.
Read the full summary
Chancery. Heard upon pleadings and master’s report at the December Term, 1897, Addison County, before Munson, Chancellor, whose decree limited the recovery against the defendant Tupper to one-fifth of four hundred dollars. The orator appealed. cited Kidder y. Rixford, 16 Vt. 169; Sanborn y. Braley, 47 Vt. 170; Farrand y. Gleason, 56 Vt. 633; Webb v. Laird, 59 Vt. 108: 62 Vt. 448; Lamson y. Worcester, 58 Vt. 381; 4 Kent’s Com. 370; 1 Wash. Real Prop. 663; Meeting House Society sc. Rochester, 66 Vt. 501; Campbells. Mesier, 4 Johns. Ch. 333. Tupper cited Kidder y. Rixford, 16 Vt. 169; Farrand v.…
1Opinion of the CourtTyler, J.
The following are substantially the facts found by the master :
The orator and the defendants, A. P. Tupper and H. S. Peck, were tenants in common of a water power on the west side of Otter Creek in Middlebury and of aflumeabout one hundred and thirty feet long for the utilization of the power, about twenty feet of the flume being called the bulkhead. By the terms of the conveyances by which these two defendants acquired their rights as such tenants they were obliged each to contribute one-fifth part of the cost of building and keeping the flume and bulk-head in repair. On April 18, 1895, the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Farrand v. GleasonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1884
3Cited by1 opinion
- Woodbury Et Ux. v. Stetson Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1936