Fogus v. Ward
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, Washoe County. I. The language of the deed, deliberately adopted, is the sole evidence of the intentions of the parties to the conveyance, for no other evidence, usage or otherwise, was competent or offered in the case, and the case must be decided upon the construction of the language contained in the deed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, Washoe County. I. The language of the deed, deliberately adopted, is the sole evidence of the intentions of the parties to the conveyance, for no other evidence, usage or otherwise, was competent or offered in the case, and the case must be decided upon the construction of the language contained in the deed. Is there any room for construction? (Story on Contracts, Sec. 639.) The deed, conveys one-half of the ditch and flume in controversy, minutely and particularly describing them, and then withdrawing their attention from the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Earll, J.:
On and prior to the 20th day of January, 1869, one M. C. Lake owned and possessed in fee the whole of the water ditch, flume, franchise and water privilege in controversy in this action, and the parties respectively claim title from him. The defendants claim the whole thereof, under a deed from said Lake to the plaintiff, dated January 20, 1869, the title thus acquired having, by subsequent mesne* conveyances, passed from the said plaintiff and vested in Andrew Forbes, the lessor of the defendants. The plaintiff claims an undivided half of said ditch, flume, etc., by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Flagg v. EamesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1867
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hendricks v. PerkinsNevada Supreme Court · 1982