Dewing v. Old Black Point Assn.

Connecticut Superior Court

Dewing v. Old Black Point Assn.

111 A.2d 29, 19 Conn. Super. Ct. 230, 19 Conn. Supp. 230, 1954 Conn. Super. LEXIS 132

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedDecember 13, 1954

DocketFile 99364

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 111 A.2d 29 (Dewing v. Old Black Point Assn.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dewing v. Old Black Point Assn., 111 A.2d 29, 19 Conn. Super. Ct. 230, 19 Conn. Supp. 230, 1954 Conn. Super. LEXIS 132 (Colo. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

King, J.

The second count of the original complaint has been amended by amendments and by a more specific statement, and in its present form purports to allege a cause of action for injuries from a public nuisance.

The plaintiff, a young girl, was a guest at the defendant beach club, and, with its knowledge and acquiescence, was diving from a float or raft which it maintained for the purpose, moored in the public waters of Long Island Sound. The injury occurred because the plaintiff dove into shallow water.

It is true that the plaintiff in swimming in the public waters was exercising a public right. However, the complaint does not allege any interference with her in the exercise of that right. Her right, in so far as it was a public right, was to use the water; not to use the defendant’s raft. Had the injury been caused to her in her enjoyment of a public right by some act or conduct of the defendant, which interfered with the exercise of that right, *231 the plaintiff might well have stated a cause of action. Zatkin v. Katz, 126 Conn. 445, 449; Higgins v. Connecticut Light & Power Co., 129 Conn. 606, 611. But as the complaint now stands, it does not adequately set forth a cause of action for a public nuisance.

The demurrer to the second count of the complaint as amended and made more specific is sustained.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

King, J.

The second count of the original complaint has been amended by amendments and by a more specific statement, and in its present form purports to allege a cause of action for injuries from a public nuisance.

The plaintiff, a young girl, was a guest at the defendant beach club, and, with its knowledge and acquiescence, was diving from a float or raft which it maintained for the purpose, moored in the public waters of Long Island Sound. The injury occurred because the plaintiff dove into shallow water.

It is true that the plaintiff in swimming in the public waters was exercising a public right. However, the complaint does not allege any interference with her in the exercise of that right. Her right, in so far as it was a public right, was to use the water; not to use the defendant’s raft. Had the injury been caused to her in her enjoyment of a public right by some act or conduct of the defendant, which interfered with the exercise of that right, *231 the plaintiff might well have stated a cause of action. Zatkin v. Katz, 126 Conn. 445, 449; Higgins v. Connecticut Light & Power Co., 129 Conn. 606, 611. But as the complaint now stands, it does not adequately set forth a cause of action for a public nuisance.

The demurrer to the second count of the complaint as amended and made more specific is sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.2d 29, 19 Conn. Super. Ct. 230, 19 Conn. Supp. 230, 1954 Conn. Super. LEXIS 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dewing-v-old-black-point-assn-connsuperct-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack