Mathieu v. North American Land & Timber Co.

Citations

• 119 La. 896
• 44 So. 721
• 1907 La. LEXIS 561

Syllabus

<p>1. Waters — irrigation Contract — Breach-Right or Action.</p> <p>In the (rice irrigation) contract before the court, the irrigating company (defendant) is made the sole judge as to when the water shall be furnished, and in what quantities, and it is otherwise stipulated that it shall not be liable for failure to furnish water, when such failure is caused by deficiency of water at its source of supply, accidents to machinery, injuries to canal, or other failures or accidents over which it has no control.</p> <p>Held, that the control vested in the defendant is accompanied by a corresponding measure of liability, and is exercised at its peril, and that the allegation that, having control of the water, it failed to furnish same, on proper demand, under the contract, and that plaintiff thereby lost his crop, would disclose a cause of action¡ and if sustained by proof would entitle plaintiff to recover, unless defendant could show that its failure to furnish the water was attributable to one or more of the causes exempting it from liability in such case.</p> <p>2. Same — Conditions—Notice.</p> <p>Where an irrigating contract contains a stipulation to the effect that the contracting company “shall be entitled to a written notice of not less than 10 days before water will be required on the premises,” which shall be served on a particular officer “and shall state, as nearly as may be, the number of acres to be irrigated at that time,” no damage can be recovered for failure to furnish water, in the absence of allegation and proof that the notice so required was given, unless it be satisfactorily shown that the inability of the company to furnish water was admitted.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>