Stillman v. Pendleton

60 A. 234, 26 R.I. 585, 1905 R.I. LEXIS 11
Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided February 27, 1905·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The objection raised by the demurrer, that the action can not be maintained because the plaintiff became the owner of the premises subsequent to the time when the grade of the highway was changed and the gutters were constructed, is unsound. The facts alleged, if true, constitute a continuing nuisance, and an action quoties toties may be maintained. Wells v. New Haven & Northampton Co., 151 Mass. 46; Mississippi & Tennessee R. R. Co. v. Archibald, 67 Miss. 38; O’Brien v. City of St. Paul, 18 Minn. 176. In other respects the case stated is not dissimilar to the case stated in Johnson v. White, 26 R. I. 207. And see also Hathaway v. Osborne, 25 R. I. 251.

Demurrer overruled.

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

Stillman v. Pendleton, 60 A. 234, 26 R.I. 585, 1905 R.I. LEXIS 11 (R.I. 1905).

60 A. 234 (Stillman v. Pendleton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wells v. New Haven & Northampton Co.
23 N.E. 724 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1890)
O'Brien v. City of Saint Paul
18 Minn. 176 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1872)
Mississippi & Tennessee R. R. v. Archibald
67 Miss. 38 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1889)