Bennet v. Hurd
3 Johns. 438
Opinion
The proviso in the 35th section, on which the suit was brought, formed no part of the plaintiff’s title, but merely furnished matter of excuse for the defendant. It provides that persons erecting mills on the rivers declared to be public highways, and cutting canals for the use of the mills, so as not to injure the navigation, shall not be liable to the penalties of the act. It was not necessary, therefore, for the plaintiff to negative this proviso in his declaration.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Bennet v. Hurd, 3 Johns. 438 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1808).
3 Johns. 438 (Bennet v. Hurd) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. . Ebelt
73 N.E. 235 (New York Court of Appeals, 1905)
Rowell v. . Janvrin
45 N.E. 393 (New York Court of Appeals, 1896)
Reeves v. Morgan
48 N.J. Eq. 415 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1891)
United States v. Rose
12 F. 576 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1882)
Brand v. Steckert
1 Mich. N.P. 67 (Circuit Court of the 10th Circuit of Michigan, 1869)
State ex rel. Ladd v. Clark
42 Mo. 519 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1868)
Myers v. Carr
12 Mich. 63 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1863)
State v. Miller
24 Conn. 522 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1856)
Gould v. Kelley
16 N.H. 551 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1845)
Smith v. Moore
6 Me. 274 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1830)