Dartnell v. Bidwell
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Action of trespass quare clausum. Defendant pleaded general issue and brief statement claiming an easement by prescription. Verdict for defendant. Plaintiff filed exceptions to refusal of court to give certain requested instructions, and also motion for new trial. Case stated in opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtSavage, C. J.
Trespass quare clausum. In defense, it was contended that the defendant had a right of way over the plaintiff’s premises, and that the acts complained of, or some of them, at least, were done in making necessary and reasonably repairs of *229the way. A portion of the way was acquired by grant. The remainder was claimed by prescription. Whether she had such a prescriptive right was contested. The verdict was for the defendant. The plaintiff brings the case here on exceptions to refusals to give requested instructions, and on a motion for a new trial.
One of the issues in the case, and perhaps one…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Board of Commissioners v. PlotnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
- Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. HoagIllinois Supreme Court · 1878
- Reid v. GarnettSupreme Court of Virginia · 1903
- Wooldridge v. CoughlinWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1899
- Scott v. JacksonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Stickney v. City of SacoSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- Jacobs v. BrewsterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1945
- Cremer v. Cremer Rodeo Land and Livestock Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1981
- Glidden v. BeldenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Blackmer v. WilliamsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1981
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.