Thayer v. Brooks
Ohio Supreme Court
This is a Writ or Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Ashtabula County. The original action was Case, for nuisance in diverting- water from the mill of the defendant in error. The plea was not guilty. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, upon which judgment was rendered, to reverse which this writ was brought.
Read the full summary
This is a Writ or Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Ashtabula County. The original action was Case, for nuisance in diverting- water from the mill of the defendant in error. The plea was not guilty. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, upon which judgment was rendered, to reverse which this writ was brought. Pending the trial the following bill of exceptions was taken: On the trial of this cause the plaintiff called Caleb Hayward who gave testimony tending to prove the plaintiff’s possession of the mill described in the declaration, and that said mill had been driven in part by…
1Opinion of the CourtBirohard, C. J.
The error first assigned, presents for our consideration the question whether case for nuisance can be maintained in this State, the property injured lying wholly within the jurisdiction of the Courts of the State, but where the acts causing the injury complained of were done wholly without the jurisdiction, and in another State. The actions of trespass and trespass on the case for injuries to land, are local and in all cases where the act done and the injury sustained are wholly in a foreign jurisdiction, the place of the injury is the place of the trial. This doctrine is universally…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Harvey v. Mason City & Fort Dodge RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- Morris v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1890
- Farley v. Gate City Gas Light Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1898