Shreve v. Mathis
New Jersey Court of Chancery
On bill, answer, replication and proofs. The complainant is the owner of a lot of land in Atlantic City, lying about one hundred feet northerly from the north side of Pacific avenue and about one hundred and fifteen feet easterly from the east side of Yirginia avenue.
Read the full summary
On bill, answer, replication and proofs. The complainant is the owner of a lot of land in Atlantic City, lying about one hundred feet northerly from the north side of Pacific avenue and about one hundred and fifteen feet easterly from the east side of Yirginia avenue. The bill alleges that the complainant has for some years been, and that he now is, in possession and occupation of a free right of way over a private alley eight feet wide, which runs from the rear end of his lot to Yirginia avenue, and that he has been and is using the same as a right of way in the conduct of his milk business…
1Opinion of the Court
Grey, V. C.
The essence of the dispute between these parties is the de-. fendant’s denial of the complainant’s right to use the alley in question for the passage of wagons and horses in and about the conduct of his business. The execution and delivery of the deeds above recited aré not denied. That the defendant'had granted a right of way for use as a private alley, while, in form, denied in the answer, was admitted on the argument.
The defence is made, first, on the ground that the case is within the ruling of the court of appeals, in Todd v. Staats, 15 Dick. Ch. Rep. 507, to the effect that…
2Cited by9 opinions
- City of Missoula v. MixMontana Supreme Court · 1950
- Peck v. MacKowskySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1912
- Unverzagt v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1943
- National Silk Dyeing Co. v. GrobartNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1934
- Tutwiler Coal, Coke & Iron Co. v. TuvinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1908
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.