History
  • No items yet
midpage
Munroe v. Stickney
48 Me. 462
Me.
1860
Check Treatment

The opinion of the Court was drawn up by

Appleton, J.

The tendency of the evidence is to show a diversion of water from the plaintiff’s mill, arising from the acts of the defendants, which constitute the foundation of this suit. Wherever a right is invaded, the law presumes damage. Indeed, though no actual ‘injury be sustained, an action may be maintained for the wrongful diversion of water from the plaintiff’s mill, and nominal damages be recovered. Butman v. Hussey, 3 Fairf., 407. If one suffers his rights to be invaded, and acquiesc.es in an adverse claim for more than twenty years, this adverse enjoyment by lapse of time will ripen into a perfect title.

From the data before us, it is impossible satisfactorily to determine the value of water power at Calais, or the amount diverted, and the damages consequent thereupon. The defendants are to be defaulted, and the damages to be determined by the Court, or some one appointed by the Court for that purpose.. '

Tenney, O. J., Cutting, May, Goodenow and Kent, JJ., concurred.

Case Details

Case Name: Munroe v. Stickney
Court Name: Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Date Published: Jul 1, 1860
Citation: 48 Me. 462
Court Abbreviation: Me.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.