Beach v. Morgan
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Trespass, qu. el. Facts agreed. The plaintiff is lessee of a strip of land in Hopltinton, tjvo hundred and fifty feet in width, the centre line of which is coincident witli the centre line of a stream passing through it.
Read the full summary
Trespass, qu. el. Facts agreed. The plaintiff is lessee of a strip of land in Hopltinton, tjvo hundred and fifty feet in width, the centre line of which is coincident witli the centre line of a stream passing through it. The lease, made April 7, 1890, contains this clause: “ and in consideration of the rent herein agreed to be paid, the party of the first part doth hereby grant unto the party of the second part the sole and exclusive right to use the same for fish-culture and preservation, to have and to hold for the term of ten years from the date hereof, yielding and paying therefor rent at…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
The stream flowing through the land leased to the plaintiff not being navigable, and not being public water, the right of fishing in it is limited at common law to the riparian owner of the soil, and belongs exclusively to him, unless the defendant shows a right acquired in some way recognized by law. State v. Roberts, 59 N. H. 256.
So far as the facts agreed and the facts which the defendant offers to prove are evidence of a custom of fishing in the brook on the land leased to the plaintiff, they are immaterial. “ A custom to take anything from another’s land, or for a profit a prendre, is…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Griffith v. HolmanWashington Supreme Court · 1900
- Attorney General Ex Rel. Director of Conservation v. TaggartMichigan Supreme Court · 1943
- Belhumeur v. ZilmSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2008
- Thompson v. TennysonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1919
- Kunkel v. Utah Lumber Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1905
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.