Delaware & H. Canal Co. v. Goldstein

Citations

• 125 Pa. 246
• 23 W.N.C. 496
• 17 A. 442
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 711

Syllabus

<p>1. Where a canal company is legally authorized to construct and maintain a canal and basin, the enjoyment of this right carries with it the corresponding duty to construct and maintain the canal and basin in such a substantial manner as not unnecessarily to injure others.</p> <p>2. In order that property owners may recover damages alleged to have resulted from the leakage and flow of water from the canal basin, the plaintiffs must show negligence on the part of the company; for, damages resulting from the lawful use, of its works by the company, in the absence of malice or negligence, are damnum absque injuria.</p> <p>8. WTiere, in such a case, the court below instructs the jury that they must find, first, that the water came from the defendant’s canal; second that it came by reason of some negligence on the part of the company, and further that the burden is on the plaintiffs to establish these facts, and the jury upon submissible evidence find for the plaintiffs, the Supreme Court must assume the facts upon which the verdict necessarily rests.</p> <p>(a) In an action for damages by property owners, it was alleged that the construction and maintenance of a sewer by a third party conducted the water from the basin, out of the course it might otherwise have taken and into the plaintiff’s premises, and was thus the proximate cause of the injury:</p> <p>4. In such case, if the sewer was lawfully constructed and maintained, the canal company was bound to take notice of the existence of such lawful structure, by means of which and the negligence of the eonrpany, the property of others might be injured.</p>