Brandt ex dem, Walton v. Ogden
New York Supreme Court
EJECTMENT for lands in Washington County. The premises were claimed by the plaintiff, under the Kayaderosseras Patent as being a part of No. 10 in the 25th allotment. The defendant rested his title on the Queensbury Patent.
Read the full summary
EJECTMENT for lands in Washington County. The premises were claimed by the plaintiff, under the Kayaderosseras Patent as being a part of No. 10 in the 25th allotment. The defendant rested his title on the Queensbury Patent. The words in the Kayaderosseras Patent, so far as respects, the controversy, were, “from the "head of the Kayaderosseras thence eight miles more northerly “thence easterly or northeasterly to the third Falls of the Albany “river about twenty miles more or less.” On the present trial it was conceded, thatthe “ eight miles more northerly from the headofthe “ Kayaderosseras,”…
1Opinion of the Court
xompkiks , J,
The material facts upon which the plaintiffs relied to establish their construction of the patent were, 1st. That the survey of the Kayaderosseras Pa'ent, made by the commissioners who subdivided it in 1771, adopted Baker's falls as the third falls.
2d. That the survey of Cockburn, the deputy surveyor general, who surveyed the patent, also terminated at Baker’s falls.
*73d. That several of the allotments in the KayaderosseraS patent, lying without the line contended for by the defendantsj have been settled uninterruptedly under that patent.
4th. That hirer’s falls are marked on the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Donohue v. WhitneyNew York Supreme Court · 1891