Steel v. President of Western Inland Lock Navigation
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of trespass on the case. The de- . r claration stated, that the plaintiff was, in 1797, and now is possessed of a piece of intervale land, in the town of German Flats.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass on the case. The de- . r claration stated, that the plaintiff was, in 1797, and now is possessed of a piece of intervale land, in the town of German Flats. That by an act of the legislature of state, entitled “an act for establishing and opening Lock _T . . ... 13 Pvavigations within this state, passed the 30th, March, 1792, and by virtue of subsequent acts amending the same, the defendants dug and constructed a canal, for the purpose of navigation, through certain intervale lands in German Flats, and which canal was dug, constructed, and carried , , , . . n,, ,…
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
The plaintiff, so far as she sustained any injury in consequence of the culpable neglect of the defendants, in not keeping the canal in repair, was entitled to recover damages. The law necessarily imposes on the company the duty of-keeping this canal in repair ; and in all such cases where an injury has been sustained, by the want of the due care and caution of another, such person must be responsible for the damage occasioned by his neglect and omission. (Espinasse's Digest, 598. 1 Strange, 334. 2 Lev. 72.) But no damages were recoverable for the supposed injury occasioned by the stopping up…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Rigney v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
- Eaton v. B. C. & M. R. R.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1872
- Burnap v. WightIllinois Supreme Court · 1853
- Stevens v. Proprietors of the Middlesex CanalMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
- United States v. SalterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1843
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.