Kachlein v. Ralston
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Debt on obligation, conditioned for the payment of 500I. on the 27th May 1795. Plea payment, with leave to give the special matter in evidence.
Read the full summary
Debt on obligation, conditioned for the payment of 500I. on the 27th May 1795. Plea payment, with leave to give the special matter in evidence. On the 19th January 1793, the plaintiffs, by a certain article of agreement, covenanted to convey to Ralston, one of the defendants, a grist mill and three tracts of land near Easton, with all the privileges thereto belonging, reserving to themselves the right of swelling or damming the water on a tract below, called the Pulling Mill Tract, provided the water should not be raised so high as to injure the mill intended tc be conveyed. On the * 12th…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court.
The question before us is not whether the defendants may sustain a suit against the plaintiffs for the supposed injury done to them in swelling the water below; but whether the testimony offered is sustainable in the present action? That part of the defence which was grounded on the suit brought by Waggoner seems to be abandoned.
The motion of the defendants can only be supported under the defalcation act, or the liberality of the practice of the courts of this state, under the general issue of payment. The act of 1705 could never have intended that damages under *5741 a covenanb *…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Filbert v. HawkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
- Siltzell v. MichaelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842
3Cited by9 opinions
- Dushane v. BenedictSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Heck v. ShenerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1818
- Cornell v. GreenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1823
- Price v. LewisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851
- Gogel v. JacobySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1819
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.