Legal Opinion

In re Barre Water Co.

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided August 30, 1900PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Petition brought by the Barre Water Company to take waters in the exercise of the right of eminent domain.' Heard ■on the report and supplemental report of commissioners, motions to set aside and re-commit the same and exceptions thereto, Washington County, March Term, 1898, Munson, J., presiding. Motion to set aside and re-commit and exceptions to reports overruled. Reports accepted, and judgment on reports for nominal damages to certain petitionees who excepted.

1Opinion of the CourtWatson, J.

Prior to the bringing of the petition in this case, the petitioner, the Barre Water Company, had the right to take water from Jail Branch, to the capacity of a 16-inch pipe, for the purpose of furnishing the Village (now City) of Barre and the inhabitants thereof, with water for the extinguishment of fires, and for sanitary, domestic, and other purposes. In 1888 it constructed a suitable dam or reservoir on that stream and laid a 16-inch main pipe therefrom to the then Village (now City) of Barre, and laid and constructed mains and service pipes in and about the village, sufficient to supply…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bailey v. Inhabitants of WoburnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
  2. Howe v. Inhabitants of WeymouthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
  3. Fisk v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1897
  4. Leonard v. Village of RutlandSupreme Court of Vermont · 1894
  5. Hamor v. Bar Harbor Water Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1899

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Perkins v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941
  2. Helena Power Transmission Co. v. SprattMontana Supreme Court · 1907

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

Powered by the Exa API