Davis v. Rainsford
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of trespass, alleged to have been committed by the defendant' on the plaintiffs’ tenement in Boston. Trial upon the general issue. The defendant set up a title to the land, upon which that part of the tenement stood where the trespass was committed.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass, alleged to have been committed by the defendant' on the plaintiffs’ tenement in Boston. Trial upon the general issue. The defendant set up a title to the land, upon which that part of the tenement stood where the trespass was committed. It being admitted that the plaintiffs were in possession of the piece of land in dispute, the defendant read in evidence two deeds; one from the plaintiff Davis, bearing date February 17th, 1813, and the other from John Wells, of the same date, to one Caleb Hiorns; each deed conveying an undivided moiety of a certain parcel of…
1Opinion of the CourtWilde, J.
No rule of law can be more firmly established than the one relied on in the defence of this action. Whenever, in the description of land conveyed by deed, known monuments are referred to as boundaries, they must govern; although neither courses, nor distances, nor the computed contents, correspond with such boundaries. This has been long regarded as one of the fundamental rules in the construction of deeds. It is not, however, inflexible, but, like other rules of law, it must sometimes yield to exceptions. These are to be made in cases in which the reason of the rule or principle fails.…
2Cited by59 opinions
- Kingsbury v. BurnsideIllinois Supreme Court · 1871
- Fox v. Union Sugar RefineryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Thompson v. HillSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
- Barbour v. TompkinsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1906
- Robinson v. DossTexas Supreme Court · 1880
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.