Sackrider v. Beers

New York Supreme Court

Sackrider v. Beers

10 Johns. 241

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 15, 1813

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 10 Johns. 241 (Sackrider v. Beers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sackrider v. Beers, 10 Johns. 241 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1813).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

There is no just objection to the recovery of the plaintiffs below, The defendants were answerable in damages [244]*244for the injury to the p1aintiffs~ in the enjoyment of their mill, by diverting the natural course of the water. The defendants had~ no doubt, a right to build a mill on their land; but they must so construct the dam, and so use the water, as no~ to injure their neighbours below, in the enjoyment of the same water according to its natural course. (3 Caines’ Rep. 320.) The judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed-

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

Per Curiam.

There is no just objection to the recovery of the plaintiffs below, The defendants were answerable in damages [244]*244for the injury to the p1aintiffs~ in the enjoyment of their mill, by diverting the natural course of the water. The defendants had~ no doubt, a right to build a mill on their land; but they must so construct the dam, and so use the water, as no~ to injure their neighbours below, in the enjoyment of the same water according to its natural course. (3 Caines’ Rep. 320.) The judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 Johns. 241, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sackrider-v-beers-nysupct-1813.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack