Rothery v. . New York Rubber Co.
New York Court of Appeals
These are cross-appeals from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, en tered upon an order made February 15, 1881, which modified, and affirmed as modified, a judgment entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term, and which reversed an order of Special Term, denying a motion to readjust the costs by striking out an extra allowance of $250, and an item of $91, taxed as disbursement for “ surveys, maps,…
Read the full summary
These are cross-appeals from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, en tered upon an order made February 15, 1881, which modified, and affirmed as modified, a judgment entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term, and which reversed an order of Special Term, denying a motion to readjust the costs by striking out an extra allowance of $250, and an item of $91, taxed as disbursement for “ surveys, maps, profiles, and making levels.” (Reported below, 24 Hun, 172.) This action was brought to compel defendant to lower its dam, which…
1Per curiam
It was conceded by the defendant on the trial that its dam set back the water on the plaintiffs’ mill, and no prescriptive or other right to flow the plaintiffs’ premises is claimed. The only controverted question was one of fact, as to the extent of flowage caused by the dam. The trial judge found that the dam was fifteen inches higher than it should be, having reference to the plaintiffs’ rights. This' was equivalent to a finding that the dam raised the water fifteen inches on the plaintiffs’ premises. It is insisted that there was no evidence that a flowage to that extent was caused by the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mark v. . City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Hammond v. FullerNew York Court of Chancery · 1828
3Cited by11 opinions
- Henry Ford & Son, Inc. v. Little Falls Fibre Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States v. HughesNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Hunt v. SainIllinois Supreme Court · 1899
- Doty v. Village of JohnsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1910
- In re Bender's WillNew York Supreme Court · 1895
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.