Van Meter v. Hankinson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court for the City and County of Philadel- . phia, in which an action on the case was brought by the defendants in error against the plaintiff in error, and a case was stated, which was to be considered in the nature of a special verdict, as follows.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court for the City and County of Philadel- . phia, in which an action on the case was brought by the defendants in error against the plaintiff in error, and a case was stated, which was to be considered in the nature of a special verdict, as follows. “ This is an action on the case brought by the plaintiff against the defendants, for obstructing an alley or right of way' and watercourse, for the space of fourteen feet, which alley is part of the southern boundary of the plaintiff’s premises. Joseph Jaquett, by.indenture dated the 31st day of July, 1832, granted and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Sergeant, J.
It is unimportant whether the soil of the alley passed to the plaintiff by his deeds. It is sufficient if he obtained a right to the use of the alley. His deed conveys to him the lot, describing it, together with all and singular, the streets, alleys, ways, watercourses, &c. in the usual manner. This would carry the right to the use of the alley, though not particularly described, if it were laid out for the accommodation of this lot as well as others, and if Jaquett retained the right to convey it to the plaintiff. That it was laid out for…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Lindeman v. LindseySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
- Horn v. Miller, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Bedford County1890
- Ott v. KreiterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885