Rider v. York Haven Water & Power Co.

Citations

• 251 Pa. 18
• 95 A. 803
• 1915 Pa. LEXIS 630

Syllabus

<p>Water companies — Unlawful diversion of water — Trespass— Measure of damages — Permanent or transient injury — Punitive damages — Excessive punitive damages — Eminent domain — Power to condemn water — Evidence.</p> <p>1. Where an injury to real estate is permanent the measure of damages is the difference in market value, before and after the injury, or the cost of removing the obstruction whichever is the lower amount.</p> <p>2. Where the land of a riparian owner has been permanently injured by an unlawful diversion of water he may not treat the trespass as of a transient character and sue for special damages.</p> <p>3. Punitive damages must not be so excessive as to indicate that the jury was influenced by passion or prejudice and must have some reasonable relation to the injury and cause of it and must not be disproportionate to the one or the other.</p> <p>4. A water company invested with the power of eminent domain ■ can lawfully appropriate the waters of a stream outside the limits of the district for which it was incorporated, if the purpose be to supply the public in the territory where under its charter it has the right to transact its corporate business.</p> <p>5. Plaintiff whose land had been injured by the diversion of water by defendant company brought suit in trespass for damages as for a transient injury and the court instructed the jury to award damages on this basis. The evidence was in conflict as to whether the injury to plaintiff’s land was permanent or transient. The record did not show whether defendant company had the power of eminent domain but the court over defendant’s objection allowed plaintiff to offer portions of a bill in equity and answer in a former proceeding between the same parties to show that it had not the power to appropriate the water of the stream in question, on the theory that a water company cannot condemn water outside the district in which its plant is located. The jury found a verdict for compensatory damages of $1,0