Woodward v. Aborn
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Ox Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Rice, J., presiding. Case, charging that the defendant maliciously placed, and for one week kept a pile of animal manure so near to the plaintiff’s well as to render the water unfit for use.
Read the full summary
Ox Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Rice, J., presiding. Case, charging that the defendant maliciously placed, and for one week kept a pile of animal manure so near to the plaintiff’s well as to render the water unfit for use. From the evidence, it appeared, that the parties were owners of adjoining lands ; that the divisional line was very near to the plaintiff’s well; that the defendant’s servant attempted to draw a load of manure to the back part of the plaintiff’s garden, but being unable to draw it so far, lodged it very near the well; where it remained about a week. The next day after it was…
1Opinion of the CourtShepley, C. J.
— The principal cause of complaint insisted upon is, the refusal to instruct the jury, “ that if the plaintiff’s well would not have received any injury from the manure lying there, but for the extraordinary rain that fell, the plaintiff’s action could not be maintained.”
This request assumes, that if the waters of the well would not have been injured without such a rain, and that they were injured by such a rain, by reason of the negligence of the defendant there could be no legal cause of action.
A person should not place or negligently allow a deleterious substance to remain, where the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hebert v. Lake Charles Ice, Light & Waterworks Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1903
- Stone v. Roscommon Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Slyfield v. PenfoldCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895
- Maddocks v. GilesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996