Dubs v. Hanover & McSherrystown Water Co.

Citations

• 53 Pa. Super. 470
• 1913 Pa. Super. LEXIS 203

Syllabus

<p>Water companies — Diverson of water — Question of fact — Case for jury.</p> <p>1. In an action against a water company to recover damages for diversion of water from a stream whereby the plaintiff’s gristmill was deprived of power, the case is for the jury, and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff will be sustained, where the evidence for plaintiff, although contradicted, tends to show that the defendant had taken water equal to from one-fourth to one-half of the total previous flow at the plaintiff’s mill.</p> <p>2. In such a case a new trial will not be granted merely because the verdict rendered in 1912 was for $1,452.88, while it appears that plaintiff paid only $3,000 for the land and mill in 1893.</p>