Wood v. City of Auburn

• Decision Date: 13 March 1895
• Citation: 87 Me. 287,32 A. 906
• Parties: WOOD v. CITY OF AUBURN et al.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

32 A. 906

87 Me. 287

WOOD

v. CITY OF AUBURN et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

March 13, 1895.

(Official.)

Report from supreme judicial court, Androscoggin county.

This was a bill in equity brought by James Wood against the city of Auburn and its board of water commissioners, praying for an injunction to restrain the city from shutting off the complainant's water supply to his several tenement houses.

A brief summary of the bill is as follows:

The complainant alleges that he is the owner of tenement buildings in Auburn which have been a source of great revenue to him, and that the city of Auburn is the owner and possessor of the public water supply, and owns and controls the only water supply which can be used by the owners of real estate in the city; that the city is bound and obliged by law to supply water, in reasonable quantities, upon payment or tender of reasonable compensation; that the city water supply is connected with the complainant's tenements, all of which have been supplied by water from the city system: that the defendants, other than the city, are the board of water commissioners, who have the general control and direction of the water system; that the complainant paid water rents for the six months beginning May 1, 1893, and ending November 1, 1893; that he offered and tendered to the city for use of water from the 1st clay of November. 1893, to the 1st day of May, 1894, the amount charged by the city; that the city refused to receive the money unless the complainant also paid certain sums of money claimed to be due for the use of water from November 1, 1892, to May 1, 1893, be fore the city became the owner and possessor of the water system, which he declined to pay; that thereupon the city and board of water commissioners shut off his supply; that he has a claim against the Auburn Aqueduct Company for loss and damage occasioned by short water supply before the city became the owner of its system, which he has a right to set off or recoup against the water rents accruing from November 1, 1892, to May 1, 1893; that by the shutting off of water from his tenements he has been greatly injured, etc. He offers to pay the sum of money charged against his tenements for the term beginning November 1, 1893, and ending May 1, 1894. The above tenders were filed in court. A temporary injunction was issued, and the case came on for a hearing on the question of making the temporary injunction permanent.

After the hearing upon bill, answer, and testimony, the case was reported, by agreement of the parties, to the law court Bill sustained.

The testimony disclosed that during the winter of 1892-93, by reason of short supply, or from other causes, the Auburn Aqueduct Company were unable to supply the complainant's tenements with water; that thereby the complainant was put to great loss and expense; he had to abate rents in order to keep his tenants, and by reason of the want of pressure in the pipes the water froze, and he was put to great expense in repairing pipes and keeping up the water supply as well as he could; that he communicated his complaints to the aqueduct company, who told him to go ahead and do the best he could; that no adjustment was had between him and the aqueduct company while they owned the system.

When the city became the owner, the aqueduct company turned over to the city the unpaid water bills, including those against the complainant, with the statement that the complainant would make a claim.

A. R. Savage and H. W. Oakes, for plaintiff.

J. A. Pulsifer, City Sol., for defendant.

EMERY, J. Mr. Wood, the complainant, has been for some time the owner of dwelling houses in Auburn connected with the system of waterworks formerly owned by the Auburn Aqueduct Company, but now owned by the city of Auburn. For some time prior to November 1, 1892, the aqueduct company had supplied water to these houses, and had been paid the regular rates therefor six months in advance, on May and November 1st of each year, agreeably to the regulations of the company. When November 1, 1892, came round, Mr. Wood did not pay or tender the water rates for the ensuing six months as usual. He claimed that water was not being sufficiently supplied, and that in other respects the company was not fulfilling its duty to him. The company did not shut off the water, but allowed it to run into the complainant's houses during the whole period of that six months ending May 1, 1893.

In May, 1893, the aqueduct company transferred this system of waterworks, and all its bills against the water takers, to the city of Auburn....