Howe v. Ray
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Complaint under Gen. Sts. c. 149, for flowing the complainant’s land by the respondents’ dam. After the decision reported in 110 Mass. 298, a warrant was issued for a sheriff’s jury.
Read the full summary
Complaint under Gen. Sts. c. 149, for flowing the complainant’s land by the respondents’ dam. After the decision reported in 110 Mass. 298, a warrant was issued for a sheriff’s jury. At the trial before such jury evidence was introduced tending to show that more than forty years before a dam had been erected below the premises, which to some extent affected and flooded a large part of the complainant’s lower meadow, but which caused a part only of the damage complained of; that between 1850 and 1860, this dam was raised twenty inches higher than before; that thereby the rest of the…
1Opinion of the CourtColt, J.
As a general rule, in estimating damages under the mill act, it is sufficient for the jury to consider what would have been the condition of the land flowed during the time covered by the complaint if no dam had been erected, and to assess for annual damage so much as the value of the annual improvement is diminished. The comparison to be made is between the present value and productiveness of the land and what it would have been if it had not been injured by the dam. The instructions in this case were in accordance with this rule as laid down in Palmer Company v. Ferrill, 17 Pick. 58, 66,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bates v. RayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
3Cited by10 opinions
- Commonwealth v. FeciMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Produce Exchange Trust Co. v. BieberbachMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- May v. BradleeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Commonwealth v. RivetMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- Potter v. BaldwinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.