Prentice v. . Geiger
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor • of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict. (Reported below, 9 Him, 350.) The nature of the action and the facts are sufficiently set forth in the opinion. Defendant had a right to use the stream as it passed through his lands for all reasonable purposes, and in the manner in which such streams are usually enjoyed. (Carhart v. Aub. Gas.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor • of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict. (Reported below, 9 Him, 350.) The nature of the action and the facts are sufficiently set forth in the opinion. Defendant had a right to use the stream as it passed through his lands for all reasonable purposes, and in the manner in which such streams are usually enjoyed. (Carhart v. Aub. Gas. Co., 22 Barb., 307, 308 ; Radcliff v. Mayor, etc., of Brooklyn, 4 N. Y., 202; Thomas v. Brackney, 17 Barb., 654, 656-659; O'Reilly v.…
1Opinion of the CourtAndrews, J.
This action is brought to recover damages sustained by the plaintiff from the filling up of his dam by saw-dust and refuse thrown into the stream at the defendant’s mill, situated next above the mill of the plaintiff.
The original mill on the defendant’s premises was built more than thirty years ago, and was operated by waterpower until about ten years prior to the commencement of this action, when it was changed into a steam-mill. The water-mill was operated a few weeks in the spring and fall, in each year, during the period of high water, and the sawdust was discharged into the stream, and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Baldwin v. CalkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1833
3Cited by45 opinions
- Lewis v. . New York Harlem R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Strobel v. . Kerr Salt Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Colrick v. . SwinburneNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Durham v. Cotton Mills.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- People v. HulbertMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.