Legal Opinion

Welliver v. Irondale Electric Light, Heat & Power Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 26, 1909No. Appeal, No. 2PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal, No. 2, Jan. T., 1908, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Columbia Co., May T., 1906, No. 28, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Albertus W. Welliver v. Irondale Electric Light, Heat and Power Co. Trespass to recover damages, for injuries to land. Before Evans, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 2, Jan. T., 1908, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Columbia Co., May T., 1906, No. 28, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Albertus W. Welliver v. Irondale Electric Light, Heat and Power Co. Trespass to recover damages, for injuries to land. Before Evans, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Defendant presented these points: 3. It appearing that the race way is maintained in the same condition it always has been since the time of its construction, and the seepage complained of is the natural seepage incident to the character of the soil through…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Rice, P. J.,

In this action of trespass the plaintiff claimed and recovered damages for injury to his land, caused by seepage and percolation of water through the embankment of the defendant’s race.

1. The contention that the defendant cannot be held liable, in the absence of negligence, because the damages resulting to the plaintiff are the result of the defendant’s lawful use of its own land and the development of the natural resources thereof, cannot be sustained. This race is an artifical water course; it is not maintained for the development of the natural resources of the land…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. SandersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
  2. Hoag v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
  3. Robb v. Carnegie Bros., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Westmoreland County1891
  4. Grace Methodist Episcopal Church v. DobbinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  5. Hauck v. Tidewater Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Abraham v. YardumSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
  2. Ramsey v. MartinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
  3. Farmers Trust Co. v. MillerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  4. Abraham v. YardumSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API