Cress v. Varney
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Montgomery county. This was an action by Theodore Yarney and Jesse Yarney, against Henry W. Cress, to recover damages for the improper nse and detention of the water of Manatawny creek, so as to prevent the defendant from using their axe factory in so beneficial a manner as they might otherwise have done. There were two mills on the same stream; the dam and mill of Cress, the defendant in the suit, was the upper mill of the two.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Montgomery county. This was an action by Theodore Yarney and Jesse Yarney, against Henry W. Cress, to recover damages for the improper nse and detention of the water of Manatawny creek, so as to prevent the defendant from using their axe factory in so beneficial a manner as they might otherwise have done. There were two mills on the same stream; the dam and mill of Cress, the defendant in the suit, was the upper mill of the two. The lower mill, together with an axe factory, belonged to Theodore Yarney and Jesse Yarney, the plaintiffs in the suit. The writ issued…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Lowrie, J.
All the exceptions in this cause hinge upon the single proposition asserted by the plaintiff in error, that the water-right of the proprietor of the lower mill on Manatawny creek in times of drought, is to be measured by the capacity of the said mill as it was at the time of the devise of John Potts in 1768.
*508We think, however, that a generous regard to a neighbor’s rights could never fall into the error of acting on such a proposition. The essential element in the regulation attempted by that devise, is equality in times of low water. It is…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Davis v. HamiltonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Levin v. HouckSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910