DECISION IN A METER CASE.

DECISION IN A METER CASE.

A decision has been handed down by the Court of Appeals in the action of the New Rochelle (N. Y.) Water Company against Charles H. Pond, ex-President of Pelham Manor, the decision being in favor of the water company, giving it the right to install meters to determine the quantity of water used and to check waste and misuse of water, although the water is supplied at a flat rate. This, it is stated, is for the domestic uses of water as provided under an old franchise granted many years ago to another water company. It appears that the defendant refused permission to the water company to install a meter on his premises, claiming that under a prior decision of the courts he was entitled to a supply of water at a flat rate unlimited by meter or any other device, and that placing a meter would be an invasion of his property rights. The company commenced an action to decide the question and it was tried before Justice Mills in the Supreme Court at White Plains, N. Y., and it was decided in favor of the company. An appeal from this decision was taken to the Appellate Division and the decision was affirmed. The defendant appealed from this decision to the Court of Appeals which has now rendered decision in the water company’s favor.

A decision has been handed down by the Court of Appeals in the action of the New Rochelle (N. Y.) Water Company against Charles H. Pond, ex-President of Pelham Manor, the decision being in favor of the water company, giving it the right to install meters to determine the quantity of water used and to check waste and misuse of water, although the water is supplied at a flat rate. This, it is stated, is for the domestic uses of water as provided under an old franchise granted many years ago to another water company. It appears that the defendant refused permission to the water company to install a meter on his premises, claiming that under a prior decision of the courts he was entitled to a supply of water at a flat rate unlimited by meter or any other device, and that placing a meter would be an invasion of his property rights. The company commenced an action to decide the question and it was tried before Justice Mills in the Supreme Court at White Plains, N. Y., and it was decided in favor of the company. An appeal from this decision was taken to the Appellate Division and the decision was affirmed. The defendant appealed from this decision to the Court of Appeals which has now rendered decision in the water company’s favor.