Dean v. Benn
23 N.Y.S. 708, 69 Hun 519, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 844
Opinion
It seems to me that plaintiffs acquiesced in the erection of the dam to such a height as to cause the damage, and that such acquiescence, together with their silence at the time of the exchange of the deeds mentioned in the eighteenth finding of fact, should prevent a recovery by them. I see no occasion for another opinion. It was sufficiently discussed by Judge Tappan. See, also, Pom. Eq. Jur. §§ 816-818. All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dean v. Benn, 23 N.Y.S. 708, 69 Hun 519, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 844 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).
23 N.Y.S. 708 (Dean v. Benn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fischer v. Trustees of Clifton Springs
121 N.Y.S. 163 (New York Supreme Court, 1909)
Hazard v. Wilson
22 Misc. 397 (New York Supreme Court, 1898)
Lefrois v. Monroe County
34 N.Y.S. 612 (New York Supreme Court, 1895)