Stiles v. Hooker
New York Supreme Court
Case for obstructing a water-course, and flowing it back 011 tiae plaintiffs’ mill, so as to render it less useful to them; tried at the Cortland circuit, January 28th, 1825, before Theoop, C. Judge, when a verdict was found for the tiffs. A motion was now made, in behalf of the defendants, for a new trial, on grounds which are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per Savage, Ch. J.
The plaintiffs and defendants own mills on the same stream; the former about 3-4 of a mile above the latter. The defendants’ dam and mills "x'were built in 1797, and repaired in 1806 and 1816. The plaintiffs’ dam and mills were built in 1809. They allege that in 1816, the defendants raised their dam, so as to flow the water back upon the plaintiffs’ water-wheel. The proof was very contradictory, and much of it very positive. The jury have decided upon the force of it; and they are supported in their decision. The plaintiffs’ witnesses testify to the effect, of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Palmer v. MulliganNew York Supreme Court · 1805
3Cited by18 opinions
- Lewis v. . New York Harlem R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Taylor v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
- Wright & Rice v. MooreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1863
- People v. PageAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Gibson v. FischerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.