White v. South Shore Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a proceeding before a sheriff’s jury, for an assessment of the damages, occasioned by the location and construction of the South Shore railroad, by means of an embankment through and across the petitioners’ mill-pond.
Read the full summary
This was a proceeding before a sheriff’s jury, for an assessment of the damages, occasioned by the location and construction of the South Shore railroad, by means of an embankment through and across the petitioners’ mill-pond. It appeared in evidence before the jury, that the petitioners’ mills and dam were on the Monatiquot river, a navigable stream in Braintree, in which the tide ebbs and flows; that the dam was erected under the authority conferred on Abraham .Hobart by an act of the legislature, passed April 18th, 1837, (St. 1837, c. 189); and that the dam was not erected in the manner…
1Opinion of the CourtFletcher, J.
By a special act of the legislature, (St. 1837 c. 189,) Abraham Hobart was authorized to erect a mill-dam across Monatiquot river, a navigable stream, in which the tide ebbs and flows. A dam was accordingly erected and a pond raised; and the petitioners, having become the proprietors, and being in possession of the premises and privileges, seek to recover damages from the respondents, among other things, for the injury done to their mill-pond and privileges, by constructing an embankment through and across the pond.
At the trial before the jury, evidence was offered tending to show, that the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Hallgarten v. OldhamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Harding v. EldridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
- Clark v. WilliamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Audenried v. RandallUnited States Circuit Court · 1868
- Harlow v. HallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.