Crittenden v. Wilson
New York Supreme Court
On demurrer to the defendant’s pleas. The action was case, for overflowing the plaintiff’s land, in consequence of the defendant’s erecting a mill dam across the Otselic Creek or River, at Wi^eh in the county of Cortland.
Read the full summary
On demurrer to the defendant’s pleas. The action was case, for overflowing the plaintiff’s land, in consequence of the defendant’s erecting a mill dam across the Otselic Creek or River, at Wi^eh in the county of Cortland. To this declaration the defendant interposed two pleas, each being, in substance, that he was authorized to build the dam, by ail act of the legislature, passed March 22, 1822, adjoining his land, and that he complied, on his part, with all the requirements and provisions of the act, which he set forth at large in his pleas. By these, it appeared that the second section of…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per Sutherland, J.
It is contended, that the legislature had no authority to authorize the erection of a dam, in such a manner as to overflow the land of third persons ; or, if they had, that they had no right to take from such persons the privilege of having their damages assessed by a jury, and direct them to be assessed by appraisers.
The Otselic River was declared a public highway by the act of April 12th, 1813, (2 R. L. 286.) No individual, therefore, had a right to obstruct it by dams, or other erections, without a grant from the legislature. The right of the legislature to make…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People v. PlattNew York Supreme Court · 1819
3Cited by27 opinions
- Pennsylvania v. Wheeling & Belmont Bridge Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Baltimore & Potomac Railroad v. Fifth Baptist ChurchSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- United States v. Creek NationSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Bohan v. Port Jervis Gaslight Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Chenango Bridge Co. v. . PaigeNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.