Legal Opinion

Attorney General v. Ellis

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 29, 1908PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Information in the nature of a bill in equity filed in the Supreme Judicial Court for the county of Middlesex February 1, 1896, by the Attorney General at the relation of the board of harbor and land commissioners under St. 1888, c. 318, §§ 1, 2, 6, alleging that the defendant had filled in the land and made encroachments below high water mark on the waters of a great pond in Newton known variously by the names of Wiswell’s Pond, Silver Lake, Baptist Pond and Crystal Lake,…

Read the full summary

Information in the nature of a bill in equity filed in the Supreme Judicial Court for the county of Middlesex February 1, 1896, by the Attorney General at the relation of the board of harbor and land commissioners under St. 1888, c. 318, §§ 1, 2, 6, alleging that the defendant had filled in the land and made encroachments below high water mark on the waters of a great pond in Newton known variously by the names of Wiswell’s Pond, Silver Lake, Baptist Pond and Crystal Lake, and praying that the defendant be ordered to remove the filling and be enjoined from further encroachments. The case was…

1Opinion of the CourtSheldon, J.

This information was filed by the Attorney General at the relation of the board of harbor and land commissioners, to restrain the defendant from making encroachments into a pond in Newton Centre, called Wiswell’s Pond, Crystal Lake, and by other names, claimed by the .plaintiff to be a great pond and subject to the provisions of St. 1888, c. 318, now embodied in R. L. c. 96. The defendant contended, that the pond was not subject to the provisions of this statute, on the ground that the pond had been granted in 1634 to John Haynes by the Court of Assistants, and, having been thus appropriated…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Attorney General v. AbbottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
  2. Inhabitants of Deerfield v. Connecticut River RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
  3. Murphy v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
  4. Gray v. City of CambridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
  5. Attorney General v. Vineyard Grove Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Foot v. BaumanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1955
  2. LaChance v. First National Bank & Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  3. Deregibus v. Silberman Furniture Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
  4. State v. BollenbachSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  5. Norton v. WestMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API