Johnson v. Conant
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Trespass qu. cl. Facts found by a referee. Three actions brought by the plaintiff were tried together. Such of the facts as are given in the opinion of the court are omitted here. The premises described in the declaration were situated in Bath, on the easterly side of the eastern branch of the Ammonoosue river, south of the bridge and north of the pulp-mill now occupied by the defendants.
Read the full summary
Trespass qu. cl. Facts found by a referee. Three actions brought by the plaintiff were tried together. Such of the facts as are given in the opinion of the court are omitted here. The premises described in the declaration were situated in Bath, on the easterly side of the eastern branch of the Ammonoosue river, south of the bridge and north of the pulp-mill now occupied by the defendants. The westerly side of the premises, next the river, consists of a ledge of rocks called during the trial “ the nail-factory plot,” and so styled in this report for convenience only. Near the centre of the…
1Opinion of the CourtDoe, C. J.
The trespasses alleged in these suits consist of acts done by the defendants in rebuilding and enlarging a flume. The ledge in controversy is bounded on the east by the flume, on the north and west by Ammouoosuc river, and on the south by the defendants’ pulp-mill. Both parties claim certain paper title to the ledge under Richard Gookin, to whom the ledge, a grist-mill (predecessor of the defendants’ pulp-mill), flume, the land under the mill and flume, and other adjoining pieces of real estate, were conveyed by Sargent in 1815 by a deed which included the whole in one tract, described as a “…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mobile & Montgomery Railway Co. v. JureySupreme Court of the United States · 1884
3Cited by3 opinions
- Opinion of the JusticesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1891
- Bartlett v. LarochelleSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1894
- Linen v. MaxwellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1892