Longley v. Hilton
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Tenney, J. presiding. Replevin, for a steer. The defendant alleges that the steer was doing damage in his close, and avows the taking. The plaintiff replies that the steer escaped from his land into that of the defendant, by reason of an insufficiency in that part of the partition fence, which the defendant was bound to maintain. The defendant rejoins, denying any obligation to maintain any part of the fence. Issue was taken upon the rejoinder.
Read the full summary
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Tenney, J. presiding. Replevin, for a steer. The defendant alleges that the steer was doing damage in his close, and avows the taking. The plaintiff replies that the steer escaped from his land into that of the defendant, by reason of an insufficiency in that part of the partition fence, which the defendant was bound to maintain. The defendant rejoins, denying any obligation to maintain any part of the fence. Issue was taken upon the rejoinder. The plaintiff introduced the fence viewers’ assignment of the divisional line. It required each party “ to build and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of a majority of the Court, Tenney and Howard, J. J., (Shepley, C. J. dissenting,) was drawn up by
Tenney, J.
The only question involved in the exceptions is whether the assignment made by the fence viewers, and introduced as evidence at the trial was sufficient to prove a legal division of the partition fence between the parties.
Fence viewers derive all their power from the statute. Any adjudication in a matter, not within their jurisdiction, or any *334order for the performance of acts by the parties not embraced in the provisions of the statute is void.
By statute, c. 29, $ 5, where…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Fairbanks v. ChildsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860