Legal Opinion

Robeson v. Schuylkill Navigation Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 1, 1855PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County. Action on the case.

1Opinion of the Court

The facts fully appear in the .opinion of the court by

Black, J.

The defendants below were authorized by the act which incorporated them to build dams on the Schuylkill Eiver, being responsible for all injuries thereby occasioned to private property. Under this charter they caused the dam at Fairmount to be built by the city of Philadelphia. It injured the property of Peter Eobeson, the plaintiff’s father, but his claim for damages was compromised, or, rather, it was ascertained and paid, in 1823. He acknowledged satisfaction and gave them a full release. Since then the Navigation Company,…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Trombetta v. Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  2. Brush v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  3. Dogan v. GriffinMississippi Supreme Court · 1875
  4. Hunt v. SwayzeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1892
  5. Doane v. Millville Mutual Marine & Fire InsuranceNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1887

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API