City Loses Suit
In the case of S. S. Stansbury against the city of Richmond, Va., a verdict was rendered against the city in the sum of $375, subject to the ruling of the court on a demurrer, which is to be argued at a later date. The plaintiff is the owner and occupant of a house at 213 Temple street. He claims that he received official notice that he must connect his premises with city sewer and take city water under the terms of the sanitary regulations of the city. In compliance with this notice, he says he installed certain plumbing appliances and made the necessary sewer connections, after which the city entirely failed to furnish him with city water. As a result, he claims to have been put to great inconvenience and loss and that the health of his family was endangered.
In the case of S. S. Stansbury against the city of Richmond, Va., a verdict was rendered against the city in the sum of $375, subject to the ruling of the court on a demurrer, which is to be argued at a later date. The plaintiff is the owner and occupant of a house at 213 Temple street. He claims that he received official notice that he must connect his premises with city sewer and take city water under the terms of the sanitary regulations of the city. In compliance with this notice, he says he installed certain plumbing appliances and made the necessary sewer connections, after which the city entirely failed to furnish him with city water. As a result, he claims to have been put to great inconvenience and loss and that the health of his family was endangered.
If you are a current subscriber,login hereto access this content.
If you would like to become a subscriber, please visit ushere.
