Fairhaven Marble v. Adams
Supreme Court of Vermont
Appeal from the court of chancery. The bill alleged, “ That on the second day of April, 1860, and for a long time prior thereto, one Joseph Adams and Ira C. Allen were the owners in fee of a certain water-power and premises therewith connected, on Castleton River, in the village' of Fairhaven, and had a mill-dam erected across said river, creating a pond from which water was drawn to propel the wheels and machinery in a certain marble-mill situate upon the north side of said…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the court of chancery. The bill alleged, “ That on the second day of April, 1860, and for a long time prior thereto, one Joseph Adams and Ira C. Allen were the owners in fee of a certain water-power and premises therewith connected, on Castleton River, in the village' of Fairhaven, and had a mill-dam erected across said river, creating a pond from which water was drawn to propel the wheels and machinery in a certain marble-mill situate upon the north side of said mill-dam, then owned and operated by them, and also to run and operate the wheels and machinery in a certain factory…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Wheeler, J.
The orator has set forth in this bill a good cause of action for past diversion of water ; but it is not claimed by any one, that this is sufficient to give the court of chancery ju*503risdiction. The orator has also set forth that the parties are in controversy about their respective rights to the water, and asked to have these rights ascertained and established. But this does not furnish sufficient ground for equitable interference. Courts of law can as well decide upon such rights as courts of equity, in cases where the questions concerning…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lyon v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1859
- Prentiss v. LarnardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1839
3Cited by1 opinion
- Pine v. Mayor of New YorkU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1896