Plunkett v. Meredith
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court. Joseph W. Martin, Judge. The right to use a well on the premises of another is an easement, and must be conferred by writing. 19 Ark. 23; 54 Ark. 519549 Ark. 503, The measure of damages for failure'to furnish water, as specified in appellant’s contract, would be the cost of deepening the well so as to secure the requisite supply of water. 47 Ark. 168; 22 Ark. 455; 53 Ark. 1555 19 Ark. 115; 13 Ark. 9; 5 Ark. 146; 39 Ark 344.
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
Mrs C. A. Meredith bought a house and lot in Little Rock from appellant, Plunkett. Three years afterwards she brought this action, alleging that when she bought the house and lot a well was in progress of being dug on the dividing line between said lot and the adjoining lot, both of which defendant Plunkett owned, and that to induce her to purchase he agreed that he would sink the well deeper and secure for her a good and sufficient well of water for her business, which 'was that of washing for the public; but that he had neglected to sink the well and secure the water as agreed, to her…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wynn v. GarlandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1857
- Rudisill v. CrossSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1891
- Varner v. RiceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1882
- Walker v. ShackelfordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
3Cited by8 opinions
- Lambert v. JenkinsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1911
- Kuhn v. PooleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- National Surety Co. v. Board of Edu. of City of HugoSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. SandersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Carroll v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1963
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.