Legal Opinion

Chipman v. Palmer

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1877Published

Appeal from a judgment entered in favor of the defendant for tbe costs of this action. This was an action to recover damages caused by a nuisance. The plaintiff, in 1874, kept a boarding-house, near which ran a small natural stream. The defendant kept a boarding-house higher up on the same stream, and about a mile and a-half distant, and the sewer from his house ran into this stream. He had not more than forty guests.

Read the full summary

Appeal from a judgment entered in favor of the defendant for tbe costs of this action. This was an action to recover damages caused by a nuisance. The plaintiff, in 1874, kept a boarding-house, near which ran a small natural stream. The defendant kept a boarding-house higher up on the same stream, and about a mile and a-half distant, and the sewer from his house ran into this stream. He had not more than forty guests. A large number of other hotels and'boarding-houses also discharged their sewers into this stream, before it reached, plaintiff’s land. Those hotels and boarding-houses would…

1Opinion of the Court

LEARNED, P. J.:

The exception is to that part of the charge relating to damages. This embraced two points; one the measure of damages, the other the proportion of the defendant’s liability. If either was correct, the exception was too general. (Groat v. Gile, 51 N. Y., 431; Walsh v. Kelly, 40 id., 556.)

The rule of damages was correctly laid down. (Francis v. Schoellkopp, 53 N. Y., 152.)

This would seem fatal to the exception.

But I think the other part’ of the charge was correct. The plaintiff treats the nuisance as the result of a joint act of several persons, of whom the defendant is one. But…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Francis v. . SchoellkopfNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
  2. Sheridan v. Brooklyn City & Newtown RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
  3. Creed v. . HartmannNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
  4. Auchmuty v. HamCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
  5. Van Steenburgh v. TobiasNew York Supreme Court · 1837

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API