
    GEORGE MILLER, Respondent, v. CHARLES A. CHURCH, Impleaded with WILLIAM G. GURNSEY, Appellant.
    
      JYuiscmce — when notice of, must he given to defendant — damages.
    Where an alleged nuisance was created by the defendant’s grantor, notice to the defendant of the existence of the nuisance, must be shown. (MMler v. Church, 2 1ST. Y. S. 0., 259; Oonhoeton Stone B. v. B., JY. Y. and E. B. B. Oo., 51 N. Y., 573.)
    In such case a recovery cau be had only for damages accruing after the grantee had actual knowledge or notice of the existence of the nuisance.
    Appeal bty defendant from a judgment entered on a verdict for fifteen dollars damages, for injury to the plaintiff’s premises by the overflowing of a mill pond in which the defendant was claimed to have an interest, and also from an order denying a new trial on the ground of insufficient evidence and excessive damages.
    
      Robert A. Stcmton, for appellant. Edwin A. Kmgsley, for respondent.
   Opinion by

LeabNEd, P. J.

Present — LeaeNED, P. J., BoaedmaN and James, JJ.

Judgment and, order appealed from reversed, and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event.  