Case ID: f_76/html/0418-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WHEELER, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PINE et al. v. MAYOR, ETC., OF CITY OF NEW YORK.
    (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    August 4, 1896.)
    Diversion of Water — Preliminary Injunction.
    Preliminary injunction to restrain the diversion of water from a river will not tie granted when it does not appear that sufficient water would not he left for plaintiffs’ uses as ordinary riparian proprietors, nor that substantial injury would accrue, which could not he well compensated for at law.
    This was a suit by Samuel Pine and others against the mayor, etc., of city of New York, to enjoin the diversion of. water from a stream. The cause was heard on a motion for preliminary injunction.
    Stephen G. Williams, for plaintiffs.
    Francis M. Scott, for defendants.
   WHEELER, District Judge.

This cause has been heard on a motion for a preliminary injunction to restrain diversion to defendants’ water supply of the water of one branch of the Byram river from that branch above where the river passes the plaintiffs’ lands. It does not yet appear but that sufficient water would be left in the river coming from this branch and elsewhere for all their uses as ordinary riparian proprietors; nor that any substantial injury would accrue, or any that could not be well compensated for at law. Prentiss v. Larnard, 11 Vt. 135; Slate Co. v. Adams, 46 Vt. 496. Besides this, any intention of diversion of any of the water for about a year is denied; and within that time, with due diligence, the final hearing may be had.

The suggestion that the damages be ascertained, and the allowance of an injunction be made conditional upon their tender, can be more appropriately disposed of upon the hearing in chief than now. Motion denied.