Lentz v. Carnegie Bros.

Citations

• 145 Pa. 612
• 23 A. 219
• 1892 Pa. LEXIS 770

Syllabus

<p>1. One who is engaged in the manufacture of coke from coal slack, not mined upon the land which is the seat of such manufacture, is responsible in damages to a lower riparian proprietor for the pollution of a stream as an incident of the washing of the slack, in preparation for its use in making coke therefrom: Robb v. Carnegie, ante, 324.</p> <p>(a) In an action to recover damages for dumping into a stream materials carried down by the water and deposited on plaintiff’s land, the defendants pleaded the statute of limitations. It appeared that such a dumping and deposit of materials was begun seventeen years before the bringing of the suit, and had gone on continuously thereafter: ^</p> <p>2. For the purpose of providing a measure of damages, it was error to admit testimony contrasting the value of the plaintiff’s property, as in its original condition,'with its value in the condition existing when the suit was brought. Tlie question was, to what extent had the defendants made its condition worse within the six years preceding the suit.</p> <p>3. Moreover, the riiode of estimating damages applicable to cases of taking under the power of eminent domain, is not ordinarily applicable to actions of trespass. For an injurious trespass, the measure of damages is the cost of remedying the injury, unless that equals or exceeds the value of the thing injured, when such value becomes the measure.*</p> <p>4. A witness, who in his direct examination has put a value upon a farm, may be asked upon cross-examination, for the purpose of testing his knowledge and his fairness as a witness, whether he does not know of particular sales of other farm lands in the same neighborhood, at certain prices below that fixed by him in his estimate.</p>