Hazeltine v. Case
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Sauk County. Action, commenced in justice’s court July 28, 1877, to recover damages alleged to have accrued to the plaintiff as owner of land upon a natural watercourse, from the maintenance by defendant, upon his premises above those of plaintiff, on the same stream, of a hog-pen and hog-yard, in such a manner as to deprive plaintiff of the proper use of said stream, etc.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Sauk County. Action, commenced in justice’s court July 28, 1877, to recover damages alleged to have accrued to the plaintiff as owner of land upon a natural watercourse, from the maintenance by defendant, upon his premises above those of plaintiff, on the same stream, of a hog-pen and hog-yard, in such a manner as to deprive plaintiff of the proper use of said stream, etc. The complaint alleges that said watercourse is a very small stream, fed by springs immediately above defendant’s land; that its waters in their natural state are very pure, cool and…
1Opinion of the CourtCole, J.
The question whether the defendant made a lawful or reasonable use of the stream, under the circumstances, was one for the jury to determine, upon the evidence. The learned circuit court stated to the jury certain principles of law applicable to the use of water in running streams, a violation of which would constitute a nuisance. The court, in effect, charged that each riparian proprietor was entitled to the use and enjoyment of the stream in its natural flow, subject to its reasonable use by other proprietors; that each proprietor had an equal right to the use of the stream for the ordinary…
2Cited by8 opinions
- City of Janesville v. CarpenterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
- People v. HulbertMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- Welsh v. Village of RutlandSupreme Court of Vermont · 1883
- McEvoy v. TaylorWashington Supreme Court · 1909
- Demarest v. HardhamNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1881
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.