Clute v. Carr
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Columbia County. Action under mill-dam act, for flowage of plaintiff’s lands. One of the defenses was, that defendant had a right to flow the lands by virtue of a parol license given by one Doty while owner of them, or agent of the owner. • The plaintiff appealed from a judgment for the defendant. to the point that the license was void by the statute of frauds, cited Moulton v. Faught, 41 Me., 298; Pitman v. Poor, 38 id., 237 ; Mumford v.…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Columbia County. Action under mill-dam act, for flowage of plaintiff’s lands. One of the defenses was, that defendant had a right to flow the lands by virtue of a parol license given by one Doty while owner of them, or agent of the owner. • The plaintiff appealed from a judgment for the defendant. to the point that the license was void by the statute of frauds, cited Moulton v. Faught, 41 Me., 298; Pitman v. Poor, 38 id., 237 ; Mumford v. Whitney, 15 Wend., 381; French v. Owen, 2 Wis., 250 ; Hazleton v. Putnam, 3 Chand., 117 ; Thompson v. Gregory, 4 Johns.,…
1Opinion of the CourtDowner, J.
The appellant alleges that the circuit court erred in giving the following instruction to the jury: “If Doty either owned the land or was agent having authority to do so, and encouraged the building of the mill, and agreed to flow-age, and the water has not been raised above the height that he gave permission to raise it, plaintiff cannot recover, unless *533it Ras been, raised since' it passed from the ownership of Doty or his principal. A parol or oral license or permission is sufficient.”
A license is an authority to do some one act or series of acts, on the land of another, without passing any…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mumford v. WhitneyNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- French v. OwenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by10 opinions
- Thoemke v. FiedlerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895
- Huber v. StarkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
- Keystone Lumber Co. v. KolmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
- Duinneen v. RichWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
- E. K. Bonds & Co. v. FordCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.