Miles Land Co. v. Hudson Coal Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 335, Jan. T., 1913, by plaintiff, from , judgment of C. P. Lackawanna Co., June T., 1910, No. 438, for defendant non obstante veredicto, in case of Miles Land Company v. Hudson Coal Company. Ejectment for land in Moosic Borough.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 335, Jan. T., 1913, by plaintiff, from , judgment of C. P. Lackawanna Co., June T., 1910, No. 438, for defendant non obstante veredicto, in case of Miles Land Company v. Hudson Coal Company. Ejectment for land in Moosic Borough. The facts appear in the following opinion of Johnson, P. J., specially presiding, sur defendant’s motion for a new trial and for judgment n. o. v.: This is an action of ejectment brought to recover one acre and twenty-four perches of land situate in the Borough of Moosic, in Lackawanna County, on which are located a coal shaft, engine house, and boiler…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
Whether the Lackawanna river was a call of senior surveys and a boundary line of the land in dispute was submitted to the jury and their verdict was for the plaintiff. A different finding would have established conclusively the defendant’s right and have entitled it to judgment in its favor. On its motion for judgment non obstante veredicto the court properly held that the question was one of construction. What are boundaries is a matter of law for the court to be determined by construction of the deed or survey; where they are is a question of fact for the jury. We are not…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Starling v. Lake Meade Property Owners Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- Will v. PIPERSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- Girard Trust Co. v. DixonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Hutchison v. Little Four Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Koontz v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.