Southern Railway Co. v. Cagle

100 S.E. 21, 24 Ga. App. 93, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 425
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJuly 17, 1919
Docket10238
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 100 S.E. 21 (Southern Railway Co. v. Cagle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Southern Railway Co. v. Cagle, 100 S.E. 21, 24 Ga. App. 93, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 425 (Ga. Ct. App. 1919).

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

1. The right which a riparian owner of land adjacent to a non-navigable stream has to a reasonable use and consumption of its water does not include the right to use, divert, or diminish the supply so as materially and unreasonably to interfere with the rights and uses of a lower owner. Primarily each has the same and a common right to the natural and undisturbed flow of the stream, subject only to such detention or diminution as may be occasioned by a reasonable use [94]*94by others. Whether in a given instance such use shall be taken as reasonable or unreasonable is a question to be determined by the jury upon the particular facts of the case, including, among other things, the size and character of the stream, and the uses to which it is subservient. White v. East Lake Land Co., 96 Ga. 415 (23 S. E. 393, 51 Am. St. R141).

Decided July 17, 1919. Action for damages; from Hall superior court—Judge J. B. Jones. November 9, 1918. E. A. Neely, J. 0. Adams, Ed. Quillian, O. L. Faulhner, for plaintiff in error. Claude Barrett, C. N. Davis, contra.

2. The petition, as amended, seeking specified damages because of the alleged unreasonable diversion of water on the part of the defendant, whereby the earnings of the plaintiff’s mill property were diminished, set forth a cause of action. The exceptions taken to the overruling of the special grounds of demurrer are without merit. The charge of the court is without material error. It can not be said that the amount of the verdict (though in our opinion liberal) is altogether without evidence to support it.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Related

Wright v. Lovett
209 S.E.2d 15 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 S.E. 21, 24 Ga. App. 93, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southern-railway-co-v-cagle-gactapp-1919.