Horne v. Hutchins
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Biel in Equity. Hearing before Young, J., at the March term, 1902, of the superior court, to determine what orders were necessary to secure to the plaintiffs their rights in the reservoir, as required by the former opinion in this case. Horne v. Hutchins, 71 N. H. 117. The plaintiffs claimed that they were entitled to an equalized flow from the reservoir as it now exists.
Read the full summary
Biel in Equity. Hearing before Young, J., at the March term, 1902, of the superior court, to determine what orders were necessary to secure to the plaintiffs their rights in the reservoir, as required by the former opinion in this case. Horne v. Hutchins, 71 N. H. 117. The plaintiffs claimed that they were entitled to an equalized flow from the reservoir as it now exists. The defendants contended that the plaintiffs’ right to an equalized flow was limited to and governed by the drainage rights the Winnipiseogee Lake Cotton and Woolen Manufacturing Company owned in the reservoir at the date of…
1Opinion of the Court
The deed of November 29, 1854, from the Lake Company to Elisha Goodwin, has been construed by this court. Horne v. Hutchins, 71 N.H. 117. In that case it was found as a fact that no rights in the reservoir had been acquired for the benefit of privilege C by the conduct of the parties subsequent to the execution of the deed; and the construction placed upon the deed was, in substance, that while it did not in express terms convey to the plaintiffs' grantor any specific rights in the reservoir at dam A, yet by reasonable intendment and construction "the grant of the `right to use the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Horne v. HutchinsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1901
- Logan v. EatonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1891
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hill v. HillSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1907
- Hutchins v. BerrySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1906
- Hutchins v. BerrySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1907