Hammond v. . Zehner
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Supreme Court. Action to recover damages for flowing lands of the plaintiff, by means of a dam erected by the defendant across the Canaseraga creek, in the county of Livingston.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Supreme Court. Action to recover damages for flowing lands of the plaintiff, by means of a dam erected by the defendant across the Canaseraga creek, in the county of Livingston. The defendant set up in his answer that* the creek was a public highway, and that by an act of the Legislature, passed April 11th, 1820, one Isaac Havens was authorized to construct a dam across the creek, not to exceed three feet high, and that Havens accordingly constructed the dam complained of, which has been ever since continued; and that Havens, on the 5th July,' 1831, being the owner in fee of…
1Opinion of the CourtClerks, J.
The question is fairly presented, whether the uninterrupted use of the dam for twenty years was a sufficient defence, without any other manifestation of an adverse possession than the effect which it produced during that time on the plaintiff’s land. In other words, will this uninterrupted use be presumptive proof of an adverse possession ?
Undoubtedly, the object of the law in' requiring that possession or user should be adverse, is that the person against whom the claim is made or the right is exercised, should be made aware of the fact so as ■ to give him an opportunity of legally resisting…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Parker & Edgarton v. FooteNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Jackson ex dem. Bonnell v. SharpNew York Supreme Court · 1812
3Cited by42 opinions
- Di Leo v. Pecksto Holding Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1952
- White v. Manhattan Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1893
- American Bank Note Co. v. New York Elevated RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Pirman v. ConferNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
- Mitchell v. BainIndiana Supreme Court · 1895
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.