Robino v. North Sewickley Township
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 179, April T., 1911, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Beaver Co., Sept. Term, 1907, No. 399, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Joseph Robino v. North Sewickley Township.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 179, April T., 1911, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Beaver Co., Sept. Term, 1907, No. 399, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Joseph Robino v. North Sewickley Township. Trespass to recover damages for injury to property caused by the diversion of waters. ' The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court- The court charged in part as follows: [If you find that the township authorities did change the natural course of the water, and that by reason of that change, the plaintiff sustained damages because of the overflow of water on his property, by bringing water…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
The plaintiff is the owner of a lot in a plan of lots laid out by the Ellwood Lumber Company. This plan, or so much of it as is exhibited by the draft attached to the paper-book, as it stretches from north to south is so cut by the county line dividing the counties of Lawrence and Beaver, that about two-thirds of the lots shown are in the former county, the remainder of them in the latter. The land rises with some rapidity from north to south so that the portion of the plan in Beaver county, as well as the adjacent land further south, is higher than the portion of the plan…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bohan v. Avoca BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Gates v. Pennsylvania R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Torrey v. City of Scranton, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County1890
- Weir v. Plymouth BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Huddleston v. Borough of West BellevueSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mitchell v. City of New CastleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923