Shury Plaintiff against Piggot Defendant

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1688
Date01 January 1688
CourtCourt of the King's Bench

English Reports Citation: 81 E.R. 280

King's Bench Division

Shury Plaintiff against Piggot Defendant

See Dalton v. Angus, 1881, 6 App. Cas. 825; Bradford Corporation v. Ferrand [1902], 2 Ch. 660.

[339] terming pasch.-e, 2 car. banco eegis. shury Plaintiff against piggot Defendant. Entred Terrain. Hillar. 1 Car. B. E. Eot. 124. [See Dalton v. Angus, 1881, 6 App. Cas. 825; Bradford Corporation v. Ferrand [1902], 2 Ch. 660.] An action upon the case. Poph. 166. Jones Eep. 145. Latch. 153. Noy 84. Ben. 188. In an action upon the case, for stopping of a water-course, which had used to have its current from such a place, through such a place, and so to come into the 3 BULSTRODE, 840. TERMIN, PASCH. 1 CAR. B. R. 281 plaintiffs yard, and there to fill and supply a pond with water, for the necessary watering of his cattel, that the defendant hath erected a stone-wall, and so hath stopped this, that the plaintiff wanted his water, and was by this dampnified. The defendant pleaded in bar, a unity of possession in the land of the house, and place to which, and of the land through which, and of other land, of which, &c. The only question moved, and insisted upon was, whether this unity of possession will extinguish this water-course or not. Thia case was argued at the Bar, and much debated, and for further argument, the same was adjourned to another time. Afterwards, (s) termin. Mich. 2 Car. R. B. R. this case was moved again, and urged, that by this unity of possession, the water-course is not extinguished ; and for this purpose, Coke 4 pars Terringhams case, 14 H. 4. fol. 7. profite apprender extinct by unity. 21 E. 3. fol. 2. a way extinct by unity. 35 H. 6. fol. 55, 56. a warren not extinct by unity, he may hawk in his own land. 16 Eliz. Dyer fol. 326. 13 Eliz. Dyer fol. 295. II H. 7. fol. 25. the case of the gutter not extinct by unity, as it was urged. Termin. Hillar. 36 Eliz. B. R. Rot. 1332. a case between Herneden and Crowd), was urged, that service of inclosure extinct by unity, and 39 Eliz. Harringtons case was urged, in which it was adjudged, that service of enclosure shall be extinct by unity of possession, and not to be afterwards revived. Hillar. 4 Jac. B. R. Jourden against Atwood, the case of a way adjudged, to be extinct by unity, as it was urged, and not to be revived. 24 E. 3. fol. 25. common extinct by unity. 11 H. 4. fol. 5. a way extinct by unity. [340] Dodderidge Justice. If I have a mill, and a water-course unto it, he sells the land, he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Stainton v The Metropolitan Board of Works, and the Lewisham District Board of Works
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 1 January 1857
    ...369); Acton v. Blundell (12 Mee. & W. 324); Arkwright v. Gell (5 Mee. & W. 203); Chasemore v. Wyke (April 1856, Exch.); Shwry v. Piggot (3 Bulst. 339); 11 & 12 Viet. c. 112, ss. 38, 50; 18 & 19 Viet. c. 120, ss. 150, 151; Coats v. Clarence Railway Company (1 Russ. & Myl. 181); Greatrex v. H......
  • Sampson v Hoddinott
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Common Pleas
    • 28 November 1857
    ...grant from long acquiescence on the part of the riparian proprietors above or below it, but is ex jure naturse,"-citing Shury v. Piggot, 3 Bulstr. 339, Tyler v. Wilkinson, 4 Mason's (American) Bep. 397. With regard to the back-water cut, its origin does not appear. [Cresswell, J. It would s......
  • Doe, on the demise of Mitchinson, against Carter
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • 23 November 1798
    ...for Essex, before Mr. Justice (a) Vide Parker v. Welsted, 2 Sid. 39, 111. Sury v. Pigot, Poph. 166. Palm. 444. Latch, 153. Noy, 84. 3 Bulstr. 339, S. C. 8T.R.58. DOE V. CARTER 1265 Buller, a verdict was found for the lessor of the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of this Court on the follo......
  • Will. Reynolds v Edw. Clarke
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court
    • 1 January 1790
    ...only a consequence of the act done; but case will lie. Judgment was given for the defendant. (a) D. ace. Dav. 5 a. b. (b) Vide Poph. 166. 3 Bulstr. 339. W. Jon. 145. Latch, 154. Noy, 84. Cro. Jac. 170. 2 Sid. 39, 111. Ow. 121. 11 H. 4, 5 a. Bro. Extinguishment, pi. 11. Fitz. Extinguishment,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT