Cosgrove v. Hatfield - Why Charles Wasn't Paying Charles

Spencer: Cosgrove was very hesitant to pay Charles what he was owed because people were starting to sue the City for compensation as a result of Hatfield's flood. He argued that until proven otherwise, the flood should be considered an act of God rather than something that Charles had produced. Spencer: There were two trials, and both ruled that the rain had been an act ofGod which meant Charles was off the hook for the damages but also that he wouldn't get paid. It didn't end up going anywhere.