Klingensmith v. Ground
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the common pleas of Alleghany county. This was an action of trespass by Peter Klingensmith against John Ground and others, for landing their ferry boat on plaintiff’s land, in which the question was, whether the plaintiff’s land extended to low-water mark, and this depended upon the legal construction of the description of the land, as contained in the plaintiff’s deed by which he held.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the common pleas of Alleghany county. This was an action of trespass by Peter Klingensmith against John Ground and others, for landing their ferry boat on plaintiff’s land, in which the question was, whether the plaintiff’s land extended to low-water mark, and this depended upon the legal construction of the description of the land, as contained in the plaintiff’s deed by which he held. The court, below, thus detailed the facts, and charged the jury upon them: “ The first question arising in this case is exclusively one of fact for the jury to pass upon. At what point did the…
1Per curiam
There is much good sense in M’Cullock’s Lessee v. Aten, 2 Ohio R. 307. A corner tree is not always to be had where it is wanted, and where that is the case, it is the practice to mark the next convenient one, leaving the exact point of intersection to be determined by an extension of the lines, as marked on the ground. Where a running stream is called for, it is always understood that the ownership extends to low-water mark, and so far has this been held in Pennsylvania; that a traverse line has been held, technically to pursue the meanders, so as to include the points that would otherwise be…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Coovert v. O'ConnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
- Wood v. AppalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Gibbs v. SweetSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Hutchison v. Little Four Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Penington v. CoatsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.