DeRochemont v. B. & M. Railroad
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case (1), for obstructing a navigable creek to the special damage of the plaintiffs; (2) for obstructing the plaintiffs’ private way; (3) for not maintaining farm-crossings in suitable repair.
Read the full summary
Case (1), for obstructing a navigable creek to the special damage of the plaintiffs; (2) for obstructing the plaintiffs’ private way; (3) for not maintaining farm-crossings in suitable repair. The plaintiffs own a farm in Newington, bounded easterly by the Piscataqua river, a navigable stream, in which there is a daily ebb and flow of the ocean tide, and there is a creek extending westerly from the river into the farm, in which there was a like ebb and flow of the tide, till obstructed by the defendants, to and from a wharf thereon, making it navigable for gondolas and other small craft, and…
1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.
The plaintiffs claim damages for the defendants’ obstruction, by their road-bed, of a water-way and drive-way between a part of their farm and the Piscataqua river, and for not maintaining farm-crossings in suitable repair. The alleged neglect to keep the farm-crossings in suitable condition raises no question of law.
The land on which the railroad is constructed across the plaintiffs’ farm was conveyed to the railroad by one of the plaintiffs by a deed of warranty March 15, 1873, by the following description: “A certain piece of land situated in said Newington being the same upon which said…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hubbard v. NortonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1835
3Cited by2 opinions
- Goudie v. FisherSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1920
- First Unitarian Society v. Citizens Savings & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1913