Summy v. Mulford

5 Blackf. 113, 1839 Ind. LEXIS 37

Opinion

IT was held in this case, that after a party had erected a mill-dam, he could not, under the statute of 1831, have a writ of ad quod damnum. Smith v. Olmstead, ante, p. 37

(1).

The law is now otherwise. The statute of 1842 enacts, “ that it shall be lawful for any person who has already erected a dam, to make application for a writ of ad quod damnum, in like manner as if he were desirous of erecting a dam, but had not already done it.” Acts of 1842, p. 158.