Watkinson v. McCoy

Citations

• 23 Wash. 372
• 63 P. 245
• 1900 Wash. LEXIS 368

Syllabus

<p>NAVIGABLE WATERS — BOOMING LOGS — DAMAGES.</p> <p>In an action by a riparian proprietor along the banks of a navigable or floatable stream to recover damages for injuries incurred through the act of the defendants in obstructing the stream while booming logs, so as to cause the water to rise and flood his lands, it is unnecessary to allege in the complaint that the injury was caused by the negligence or want of care of defendants, since it is immaterial in such a case whether or not' there was negligence on the part of defendants.</p> <p>SAME — DEFENSES.</p> <p>In an action for damages for obstructing a river with logs, and for an injunction to restrain the further commission of such acts, it is not a defense to set up that defendants have expended large sums in improving the channel of the river, and have better adapted it for the drainage of the adjoining lands, since benefits cannot be set off in such a case against damages sustained.</p> <p>SAME-EVIDENCE.</p> <p>Where the rights of defendants extend only to rafting logs down a river and not to booming them, evidence of where it would be most convenient for them to boom them is immaterial in an action to enjoin such use.</p> <p>SAME-INJUNCTION.</p> <p>Where it appears that the injury to a riparian proprietor from the booming- of logs on a navigable river will be a continuing one, the court is warranted in controlling such improper use of the river by a perpetual injunction.</p>