Legal Opinion

Honenstine v. Vaughan

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided December 2, 1845PublishedCited by 1 opinion

ERROR to the Allen Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtDewey, J.

— This was an application for a writ of ad quod damnum. The petition sets forth that Honenstine, the petitioner, was the owner of a mill and dam, already erected on certain premises owned by him in fee-simple; that the dam was across the St. Mary's river; that O. Vaughan, Small, J. Vaughan, and Drage, were respectively the owners of certain tracts of land (describing them) lying on the river above the dam; that those persons complained that the lands described were injured by the overflow of water occasioned by the obstruction, and that they (the persons) were otherwise injured; — wherefore…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Lane v. MillerIndiana Supreme Court · 1861

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API