Batchelder v. Sanborn
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Case, for flowing the plaintiff’s land by a dam. For a long time before, and until 1829, those under whom the defendant derived his title had been accustomed to flow the plaintiff’s land in spring and autumn, drawing off the water during the summer. In that year and the next the defendant took away the old dam and built a new one of stone, and put up valuable mills, to be operated through the entire season.
Read the full summary
Case, for flowing the plaintiff’s land by a dam. For a long time before, and until 1829, those under whom the defendant derived his title had been accustomed to flow the plaintiff’s land in spring and autumn, drawing off the water during the summer. In that year and the next the defendant took away the old dam and built a new one of stone, and put up valuable mills, to be operated through the entire season. In 1830 portions of the top of the dam were carried away, and were replaced by the defendant, or those whom he employed. The plaintiff was present several times during the construction of…
1Opinion of the CourtPbrley, J.
-The plaintiff was present several times during the construction of the dam; worked for the defendant in making the repairs ; knew that the dam when put in use would flow his land; that the intention was to keep up the water during the whole year; there was'no evidence that he forbade the defendant to proceed with the work; and he said to third persons that the mill would be a benefit to the neighborhood, and urged the workmen to make the dam tight.
The court charged the jury that this was evidence, but not conclusive evidence, of a license : That if the defendant understood from the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Comth. ex rel. Jordan v. Bigelow, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Schuylkill County1873
- Proprietors of Enfield v. DaySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1835
- Inhabitants of Wilton v. HarwoodSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1843