Miller v. Windsor Water Co.

Citations

• 148 Pa. 429
• 23 A. 1132
• 1892 Pa. LEXIS 998

Syllabus

<p>Water companies — Act of April 29, 1874 — Appropriation of a stream.</p> <p>The act of April 29, 1874, section 34, P. L. 93, authorizing water companies incorporated under the provisions of the act to appropriate to their use the waters of a stream, contemplates a single taking and one assessment of damages. In an issue framed on an appeal from an award by viewers of damages for such taking, and where the pleadings in conformity with the act rest upon a bond filed by defendant company, which shows that a permanent appropriation of the entire stream was intended evidence on defendant’s part that the water of the stream was not entirely exhausted, but sufficient remained for plaintiff’s uses, is immaterial.</p> <p>Water companies — Measure of dam,ages for property taken.</p> <p>In cases of such taking, the measure of damages is the difference in value of the whole property before and after the appropriation of the stream. The rule is to inquire what would the entire property unaffected by the appropriation have sold for, and what would it sell for as affected by tlie appropriation. The difference is the true measure of compensation.</p> <p>The jury must consider the question of damages without reference to the person of the owner, or the actual state or profits of his business. At the same time they may consider the use to which a property may be put, and if, by reason of its location or use, it may be worth more than if used for other purposes, its market value is governed accordingly.</p> <p>Evidence — Assessment for taxation — When admissible.</p> <p>Assessments or valuations for taxation are a very unreliable measure of market value at the time they are made. Their relation to the true value of the property is known to vary greatly in different counties.</p> <p>While a recent assessment of this nature would have been admissible in evidence, one made eight years before the taking of the property of which the value was in dispute was properly rejected by the cour