Summary
In Garwood v. N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co. (116 N.Y. 649) the diversion, as shown by the record on file in this court, was less than that testified to by the defendant's witnesses in the case before us. Even if the damages are slight, where the act complained of is such that by its repetition or continuance it may become the foundation or evidence of an adverse right, a court of equity will interpose by injunction.
Summary of this case from Strobel v. Kerr Salt Co.Opinion
Argued May 2, 1889
Decided October 8, 1889
Daniel H. McMillan for appellant.
James Breck Perkins for respondent.
Per Curiam mem. for affirmance of order and for judgment absolute against defendant on stipulation.
All concur, except BRADLEY and HAIGHT, JJ., not sitting.
Order affirmed and judgment accordingly.