Smith v. Morrill
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Eeport. Trover, for a quantity of logs alleged to have been converted by the defendants in 1860. The writ is dated November 6, 1868. There was evidence tending to show that, in the winter of 1858 — 9, the plaintiff lumbered on his township, called Holeb,'adjoining which was the township called Forsyth, owned by the defendants; that the line between the townships was well marked and known to the plaintiff and his servants ; that, during the operation, the plaintiff’s…
Read the full summary
On Eeport. Trover, for a quantity of logs alleged to have been converted by the defendants in 1860. The writ is dated November 6, 1868. There was evidence tending to show that, in the winter of 1858 — 9, the plaintiff lumbered on his township, called Holeb,'adjoining which was the township called Forsyth, owned by the defendants; that the line between the townships was well marked and known to the plaintiff and his servants ; that, during the operation, the plaintiff’s servants, having cut all his timber accessible without removal of camps, breaking new roads, The Court were to render such…
1Opinion of the CourtAppleton, C. J.
The plaintiff and defendants were owners of adjacent townships. The plaintiff trespassed upon the defendants’ land, —cutting thereon a considerable quantity of logs, which were marked similarly to those cut on his own land, and were run with them to Gardiner.
The defendants having ascertained that the plaintiff had trespassed upon their land, seized a portion of the logs thus commingled, as cut on their premises, and more, as the plaintiff alleges, than were so cut. This action is brought to recover such excess.
As the plaintiff was a trespasser, the defendants had a legal right to seize the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Chandler v. De GraffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1878
- McKenzie v. RedmanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1895
- Jewett v. DringerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1878