Chesnut Hill & Spring House Turnpike Co. v. Rutter
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. THIS was an action of trespass on the case, in the Common Pleas of Montgomery county, for stopping a water course.
Read the full summary
In Error. THIS was an action of trespass on the case, in the Common Pleas of Montgomery county, for stopping a water course. The declaration stated, that the defendants below, the plaintiffs in error, were incorporated by an act of assembly, Passe<* on the 5th day of March, 1804, entitled, “an act to enable the Governor of this Commonwealth, to incorporate a company to make an artificial road, from the top of ChesnUt EiHi through Flourtown, to the Spring House tavern, in Montgomery countythat the plaintiff was seised of a messuage> tanyard, and tract of land, through which a rivulet from time…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Tilghman C. J.
This is an action on the case, brought by James Rutter against The Chesnut Hill & Spring House Turnpike Company, for an injury done to the plaintiff’s land and tanyard, in consequence of certain piers erected by the defendants, on each side of a stream of water, by which the stream was .obstructed and thrown back, and overflowed .the plaintiff’s land.
The defendants below, who are plaintiffs in . error, rely off two objections. 1. That a corporation is not suable in this kind of action. 2. That the declaration does not state a good cause…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- The BANK OF COLUMBIA v. PATTERSON’S Adm’rSupreme Court of the United States · 1813
3Cited by21 opinions
- Doe v. Exxon Mobil Corp.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2011
- New York & New Haven Railroad v. SchuylerNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Jesner v. Arab Bank, PLCSupreme Court of the United States · 2018
- Nestlé USA, Inc. v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2021
- City of St. Louis v. GurnoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1849
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.