Chase v. Perry
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close in Dighton, and trampling upon and destroying corn, potatoes and grass growing thereon. The defendant Perry justified under a right of way by necessity across the plaintiff’s land to and from his own land, and the other defendants justified as servants of Perry.
Read the full summary
Tort for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close in Dighton, and trampling upon and destroying corn, potatoes and grass growing thereon. The defendant Perry justified under a right of way by necessity across the plaintiff’s land to and from his own land, and the other defendants justified as servants of Perry. Trial in the Superior Court, before Allen, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows : A plan was introduced at the trial for the purpose of showing the relative position of the plaintiff’s and Perry’s lot, the way as claimed by the defendants, and the highway.…
1Opinion of the CourtLord, J.
The bill of exceptions shows no error in the admission of evidence. The action is for tort in passing over the plaintiff’s planted land. The answer of Perry justifies his passing over in a way which he claims to have been a regularly located way of necessity. The other defendants justify as the servants of Perry in a proper use of such way.
In support of the defendants’ answer, evidence was offered tending to show that very many years ago there was a way across the plaintiff’s lot, where Perry claimed the way to be; there was evidence also tending to show that for almost every year from 1824…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wynkoop v. BurgerNew York Supreme Court · 1815
3Cited by3 opinions
- Starkie v. RichmondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Hoyt v. KennedyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Town of Bedford v. CerasuoloMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2004