Rugg v. Ward
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass for the cutting of certain trees. Heard upon the report of a referee at the September term, 1891, Tyler, J., presiding. Judgment pro forana, for the plaintiffs. The defendant excepts. In 1865 the female plaintiff conveyed the premises owned by the defendant to one Hallihan describing them as bounded on theeastbythe “ Lewis H. Beals farm,” and Hallihan conveyed to the defendant by the same description.
Read the full summary
Trespass for the cutting of certain trees. Heard upon the report of a referee at the September term, 1891, Tyler, J., presiding. Judgment pro forana, for the plaintiffs. The defendant excepts. In 1865 the female plaintiff conveyed the premises owned by the defendant to one Hallihan describing them as bounded on theeastbythe “ Lewis H. Beals farm,” and Hallihan conveyed to the defendant by the same description. It was claimed that tire trespasses were committed on the said Lewis H. Beals farm, of which the female plaintiff had become the owner, and the question was as to the location of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
ROSS, Ch. J.
The question in controversy, is in regard to the division line between the land of the plaintiff and the land of the defendant.
The referee reports, that, if the oral testimony admitted, was properly received and considered, the line is as claimed by the plaintiff. The defendant derivedliis title from Stephen Iiallihan, who received his from the plaintiff’s wife. On the controverted line, they were bounded by the Lewis LI. Beals farm. That farm was surveyed, and partitioned between the heirs of Lewis Ii. Beals in 1857. The portion adjoining…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hull v. FullerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1835
- Pingry v. WatkinsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Patch v. KeelerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
- Clary v. McGlynnSupreme Court of Vermont · 1874
3Cited by1 opinion
- Douglass & Varnum v. Village of MorrisvilleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1915