Morris v. Beardsley
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action for trespass to land; brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Fairfield County. Facts found and case reserved for advice. The general principles laid down by the court will be sufficiently understood from the opinion ; the special facts could not be understood without a map.
1Opinion of the CourtPardee, J.
Land of the plaintiff adjoins that of the defendant. The former complains that the latter has trespassed by driving piles upon his land. The two pieces of land are a part of the shore.of Bridgeport harbor ; in 1837 both formed a part of the intestate estate of Ira Curtis, deceased, which included upland. In the distribution the part of the shore now owned by the plaintiff was described in these words, viz :—“ Also the westerly half of the water lot lying south of the above described piece ; ” the “ above described piece ” being a portion of the upland. The deed of the distributee to a…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Rochester v. BarneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Water Street Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Innopak Plastics Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Lowndes v. WicksSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1897
- Spath v. LarsenWashington Supreme Court · 1944
- Lane v. Smith Bros.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1907