Gillett v. Johnson
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action on tbe case, for the diversion of a stream of water, tried in the superior court on the general issue, closed to the. court, before Seymour, J. On the trial it appeared that the plaintiff owned the premises described as his in the declaration, and that the defendant owned an adjoining close, and that on the defendant’s premises was a spring, the waters of which, before the diversion complained of, had, from time immemorial, found their way to the premises of the…
Read the full summary
Action on tbe case, for the diversion of a stream of water, tried in the superior court on the general issue, closed to the. court, before Seymour, J. On the trial it appeared that the plaintiff owned the premises described as his in the declaration, and that the defendant owned an adjoining close, and that on the defendant’s premises was a spring, the waters of which, before the diversion complained of, had, from time immemorial, found their way to the premises of the plaintiff, and furnished him with a convenient watering place for his cattle. As measured by the course of the water, the…
1Opinion of the CourtButler, J.
The facts detailed in this motion do not show *183that any injustice was done to the defendant by the decision of the court below. It clearly appears that a water-course existed from the spring to the premises of the plaintiff, which had been immemorially and beneficially used by him for watering his cattle. It was a small but constant stream, failing only when all or nearly all such small streams fail, by reason of drought; - running rapidly in a well defined course between abrupt banks, where the fall was considerable ; and sluggishly but continuously in a natural and defined bed, where the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Merwin v. WardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1843
3Cited by29 opinions
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- People v. HulbertMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- O'Connell v. East Tenn., Va. & Ga. Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1891
- Meng v. CoffeeNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.