King v. Tiffany
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an actiop on the case, for raising the water of the river Scantic, by means of a dam, so as to interrupt the plain- tiffs in the use of the water, at their forge above, on the same ° stream. The cause was tried at Hartford, February term, 1832, before Williamr, J. The plaintiffs’ forge and dam were erected in the year 1802; and they claimed, that they had a right to the use of the water in the same manner as they liad enjoyed it for fifteen years after that time.
Read the full summary
This was an actiop on the case, for raising the water of the river Scantic, by means of a dam, so as to interrupt the plain- tiffs in the use of the water, at their forge above, on the same ° stream. The cause was tried at Hartford, February term, 1832, before Williamr, J. The plaintiffs’ forge and dam were erected in the year 1802; and they claimed, that they had a right to the use of the water in the same manner as they liad enjoyed it for fifteen years after that time. They further claimed, that the defendants, in the Spring or Summer of 1818, owning a grist-mill on the stream below,…
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
The question in the court below, was, whether the plaintiffs had sustained an injury, by the defend*ants’ raising the dam of 1829, or continuing the dam of 181% if that was then raised. This necessarily involved the enqui-ry, as to the cause of the injury ; whether it was caused by lowering the hammer-wheel, or by raising the dam. The former question must have been involved in the latter ; for if the injury arose from the act of the plaintiffs, it must follow', that it did not not arise from the act of the defendants ; and on the contrary, if it arose from the act of the defendants, it would…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ingraham v. HutchinsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1818
- Sherwood v. BurrSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1810
3Cited by2 opinions
- Post v. GilbertSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1876
- Ursini v. PiazzaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925