Noyes v. Hemphill
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, for polluting the water of the defendant’s well, the right to draw water from which is alleged to have been appurtenant to a dwelling-house of which the plaintiffs were seized. Facts found by a referee, who awarded the plaintiffs joint damages. A former owner of lots A and B conveyed A to the defendant, reserving the right to draw water by means of a pipe from the well on A for the family occupying B, and afterwards conveyed B to the plaintiff, Mrs. Noyes.
Read the full summary
Case, for polluting the water of the defendant’s well, the right to draw water from which is alleged to have been appurtenant to a dwelling-house of which the plaintiffs were seized. Facts found by a referee, who awarded the plaintiffs joint damages. A former owner of lots A and B conveyed A to the defendant, reserving the right to draw water by means of a pipe from the well on A for the family occupying B, and afterwards conveyed B to the plaintiff, Mrs. Noyes. At the time the well was polluted, the plaintiffs were drawing water from it for family use on B, and also for a bakery carried on…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
The extent of the easement in the defendant’s premises is defined in the reservation in the deed from his grantor. The reasonable interpretation of the language of the reservation is, that the occupant for the time being of the plaintiffs’ premises can draw water from the defendant’s well only for the ordinary purposes of a family. The use of an easement is to be confined strictly to the purposes for which it was granted. French v. Marstin. 24 N. H. 440, 451; Washb. on Easements 186. The plaintiffs have no right to draw water from the defendant’s well for the use of a bakery.
Any one in…
2Cited by3 opinions
- People's Trust Co. v. MerrillSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1918
- State v. HayesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- Keysar v. CovellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1882