Legal Opinion

Arnold v. Farr

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided January 15, 1889PublishedCited by 3 opinions

This was a bill in chancery setting forth that the orators were-the owners of a spring with the right to take the water therefrom ; that the water was conducted therefrom in an aqueduct that the defendant Farr had acquired by deed the right to take from said aqueduct one-sixth part of the water flowing in it; that he claimed under said deed one-sixth part of the water im the spring, and was about to put down an independent pipe for the purpose of conducting the water to his…

Read the full summary

This was a bill in chancery setting forth that the orators were-the owners of a spring with the right to take the water therefrom ; that the water was conducted therefrom in an aqueduct that the defendant Farr had acquired by deed the right to take from said aqueduct one-sixth part of the water flowing in it; that he claimed under said deed one-sixth part of the water im the spring, and was about to put down an independent pipe for the purpose of conducting the water to his buildings, which would render it impossible to equally distribute the water flowing from the spring and give to the said…

1Opinion of the Court

*447The opinion of the court was delivered by

Tyler, J.

The main question in this case is whether the deed ■from Brigham to defendant Farr conveyed an absolute title to an undivided sixth part'of the spring or a right only to take that portion of the water from some convenient point in the aqueduct.

The orator’s counsel claim in their brief that the only right Brigham’s grantors had was an undivided part of the water of the spring to be taken through the aqueduct, and that they •could convey no greater interest than they owned; that Brigham, during the time that he held title, and the defendant…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Makepeace v. BancroftMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
  2. Adams v. WarnerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1851
  3. Rood v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1853

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ralya v. E. C. Atkins & Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Cram v. ChaseSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1913
  3. Ord v. TerrySupreme Court of Vermont · 1917

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API