Sues for Water Service

Sues for Water Service

Bristol, Tenn., has brought suit against the Bristol Gas and Electric Company for $9,000, for alleged back water rent due by it to the city. Only a very short time ago a 2-inch pipe ran into the plant of the gas and electric company on Broad steet. A meter was put on the pipe and it registered the use of water sufficient to warrant a charge of $125 per month. This charge was made for six years and a bill for $9,000 sent to the lighting company. It is claimed that the pipe has been in the company’s plant a longer time. The statute of limitations, however, would bar a claim for service further back than six years. It is said to be understood that the lighting company claims to have been pumping its water from the creek near by.

In an opinion by Judge Treacy, the New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals has affirmed the judgment of the Passaic Circuit Court in the ease of Isaac A. Hall against the Passaic Water Company. The principle is laid down that a water company which has a contract to supply water to a city is not liable to an inhabitant for loss which he sustained through failure of the company to supply sufficient water to extinguish a fire. The novelty of Mr. Hall’s suit was his attempt to hold the water company liable for the burning down of his factory building in Fulton street. Paterson. He based his claim partly upon ail agreement alleged, to have been made with Superintendent William Ryle, of the water company, that the corporation would maintain a pressure of at least 10 pounds to the square inch at the outlet of two standpipes which Mr. Hall had erected in his mill as a protection against fire.

No posts to display