Hammond v. Fuller
New York Court of Chancery
This was a motion for an order requiring the defendants to remove a dam on the Paradox Creek, in the county of Essex, which the complainants alleged had been erected in such a manner as to violate the injunction issued in this cause. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the Chancellor.
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor :—The contest between the parties on this motion is, whether the dam of the defendants raises the water of the Paradox Creek at and above the line between Pliny Mooers’ patent and lot No. 306 in the Paradox tract, • above the natural level of the stream, as it existed previous to the erection of the mills-of either of the parties; and in such manner as materially to injure the mills or mill priv*198ileges of the complainants. If it does so, the defendants must lower their dam, and pay to the complainants the damages which they have sustained by the violation of the injunction. It…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Carlisle v. CooperSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1870
- Rothery v. . New York Rubber Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Carmichael v. City of TexarkanaU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Arkansas · 1899
- Woodman v. FreemanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1846
- Delaware & Raritan Canal & Camden & Amboy Railroad & Transportation Companies v. Camden & Atlantic RailroadNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1863
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.