Parker v. Griswold
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action on the case for the diversion of a watercourse. The declaration stated, That the plaintiff being lawfully possessed of a certain parcel of land, with the appurtenances thereof, situated in Meriden, containing 18⅛ acres, bounded &c. and by reason thereof, being entitled to have and enjoy the benefit and advantage of the water of a certain stream or water-course, which ought to have run and flowed, and until the diversion thereof hereinafter mentioned, of…
Read the full summary
This was an action on the case for the diversion of a watercourse. The declaration stated, That the plaintiff being lawfully possessed of a certain parcel of land, with the appurtenances thereof, situated in Meriden, containing 18⅛ acres, bounded &c. and by reason thereof, being entitled to have and enjoy the benefit and advantage of the water of a certain stream or water-course, which ought to have run and flowed, and until the diversion thereof hereinafter mentioned, of right had run and flowed, and still of right ought to ran and flow, unto said land of the plaintiff, the defendant, well…
1Opinion of the CourtStorks, J.
The firsi question in this case, arises upon the *296motion in arrest of judgment, and respects the sufficiency of declaration.
On comparing this declaration with the most approved precedents, in such cases as the present, there is an exact conformity between.them as to the principles on which they are framed, and the variation between them is of a merely circumstantial character. Most of the precedents in the books differ from this circumstantially, because they state the existence of a mill or other works of the plaintiff on his land, and that the same was worked by the water of the stream…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lincoln v. HapgoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Kilham v. WardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1806
- Crooker v. BraggNew York Supreme Court · 1833
- Curtis v. JacksonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
3Cited by63 opinions
- Alabama Power Co. v. IckesSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Flagiello v. Pennsylvania HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
- Hi-Ho Tower, Inc. v. Com-Tronics, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Pickett v. MatthewsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
- Guilford v. LoveTexas Supreme Court · 1878
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.