Hopper v. Hopper

Alleghany County Court of Common Pleas

Hopper v. Hopper

23 A. 321, 146 Pa. 365, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1231

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County

DecidedJanuary 4, 1892

DocketNo. 82

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A. 321 (Hopper v. Hopper) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hopper v. Hopper, 23 A. 321, 146 Pa. 365, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1231 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Per, Curiam :

We are not clear that the learned judge below was entirely accurate in saying that “ the plaintiff had no grant or prescriptive right in the spring on the defendant’s land.” It is true, the defendant would have the right to use all the water from the spring, if necessary for the ordinary uses of his land, but we think the plaintiff was entitled to have the surplus, if any, returned to its original channel for his use. The decree of the court below, however, provides for this, and we think works substantial justice between the parties. It is needless, therefore, to criticise the manner by which this result was reached.

The decree is affirmed, and the appeal dismissed at the costs of the appellant.

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

Per, Curiam :

We are not clear that the learned judge below was entirely accurate in saying that “ the plaintiff had no grant or prescriptive right in the spring on the defendant’s land.” It is true, the defendant would have the right to use all the water from the spring, if necessary for the ordinary uses of his land, but we think the plaintiff was entitled to have the surplus, if any, returned to its original channel for his use. The decree of the court below, however, provides for this, and we think works substantial justice between the parties. It is needless, therefore, to criticise the manner by which this result was reached.

The decree is affirmed, and the appeal dismissed at the costs of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A. 321, 146 Pa. 365, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hopper-v-hopper-pactcomplallegh-1892.