Legal Opinion

Stutz v. Martin

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 20, 1933PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDunn, J.

This was a real action to recover a parcel of land in Boothbay Harbor. A disclaimer narrowed the controversy to an area, in the form of a triangle, between the contiguous properties of the litigants. The jury found for the defendant. The plaintiff brings the case forward on a general motion for a new trial.

The plea of the general issue required that the plaintiff prove that she had such an estate in the land sought to be recovered as she had alleged, and that she had a right of entry therein when she commenced her action. Rawson v. Taylor, 57 Me., 343.

A warranty deed from the Boston and…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Gaynor v. McEachernSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1981
  2. Rogers v. Biddeford & Saco Coal Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1940
  3. McLelland v. MorrisonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API