Newcomb v. Smith
Wisconsin Supreme Court
ERROR to the Circuit Court for Washington, County. This was a complaint instituted by Newcomb against Smith, under and in accordance with the statute of the territorial legislature of Wisconsin, relating to mill-dams, passed January 13, 1840, whereby the complainant alleged that he had sustained damages upon lands and premises belonging to him, and injuriously affected by the erection of a dam by defendant, which caused the flooding of his land, and he prayed for an…
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Circuit Court for Washington, County. This was a complaint instituted by Newcomb against Smith, under and in accordance with the statute of the territorial legislature of Wisconsin, relating to mill-dams, passed January 13, 1840, whereby the complainant alleged that he had sustained damages upon lands and premises belonging to him, and injuriously affected by the erection of a dam by defendant, which caused the flooding of his land, and he prayed for an assessment of the damages he had sustained, by a jury. Yarious subsequent pleadings were interposed by the parties, but which…
1Opinion of the CourtHubbell, J.
If the act of 1840, under which this complaint was brought, is not in conflict with the constitution of the United States, or the ordinance of 1787, the judgment of the court below must be reversed.
The overflowing of the land of the plaintiff in error, by reason of the dam of defendant in error, is not denied, but the owner of the dam contends that he is prosecuted for the damage done, in an irregular manner; that he ought t® have been proceeded against by writ and pleadings at common law, and not by complaint under the statute. It would be right, I think, to tell the plaintiff in error he…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Fletcher v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Elmendorf v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1825
- WILLSON AND OTHERS v. the Black Bird Creek Marsh CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1829
- Stuart v. LairdSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Beekman v. Saratoga & Schenectady Rail RoadNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Attorney General v. City of Eau ClaireWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- Speer v. Mayor of AthensSupreme Court of Georgia · 1890
- State ex rel. Baltzell v. StewartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- Ryerson v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
- Bound v. Wisconsin Central RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.