Snow v. Cowles
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Case, for diverting the water from the plaintiff’s shop and water power, on the north channel of 'the Sugar river, in Claremont, by means of a dam across said channel above, which turned the water into another channel on the other side of an island there, called Nock island, and thus prevented it from flowing to the plaintiff’s mill.
Read the full summary
Case, for diverting the water from the plaintiff’s shop and water power, on the north channel of 'the Sugar river, in Claremont, by means of a dam across said channel above, which turned the water into another channel on the other side of an island there, called Nock island, and thus prevented it from flowing to the plaintiff’s mill. In 1844, the defendant, Albert Cowles, and one Edward Brown, owned the mills above, and then repaired and tightened their dam, so as to produce the diversion now complained of. In 1845, after these repairs were completed, the defendant, Leman Cowles, purchased of…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, J.
The only question in this case is whether the testimony of the witness, Henry Russell, and the paper containing the admission of the defendant and signed by his counsel in the case, were properly left to the jury as evidence of a sufficient notice from the plaintiff to the defendant, Leman Cowles, to entitle him to bring the action.
In Woodman a. v. Tufts & a., 9 N. H. Rep. 88, the court say, “ It would seem to be an easy matter to make a complaint for a nuisance intelligible to the person continuing it. No particular form of words is required. The person continuing a nuisance should be so far…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Woodman v. TuftsSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1837