Wynkoop v. Burger
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR from the court of common pleas for the county ^ 0f Greene. - Burger, the plaintiff in the court below, brought an action on the case against Wynkoop, the defendant below, to recover damages for an alleged obstruction of a right of way, claimed by Burger over the lands of Wynkoop, in which lie recovered a ver(bct of thirty dollars with costs.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR from the court of common pleas for the county ^ 0f Greene. - Burger, the plaintiff in the court below, brought an action on the case against Wynkoop, the defendant below, to recover damages for an alleged obstruction of a right of way, claimed by Burger over the lands of Wynkoop, in which lie recovered a ver(bct of thirty dollars with costs. A bill of exceptions was ^a^eH by the defendant below, and a writ of error brought. ^Ie counsel for the parties agreed to make a case, instead of a return to the writ of error. The locus in. quo is part of a tract of land, formerly held in common…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The judgment of the court below must be i affirmed. The right of way is established by grant; and there is, of course, no necessity for presuming a grant, from the long acquiescence in the use of the way. The grant does not designate the precise place; but the length of time the way has been used in a particular place shows the location by the„ acts and acquiescence of the parties. It would be extremely*' unjust to allow the plaintiff in error, to be changing this road whenever he pleased. As it is a private way for the accommodation of the defendant in error, it must be kept in…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Winslow v. City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Karmuller v. KrotzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
- Lamont v. HaigDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 1982
- Indianapolis & Vincennes Railroad v. ReynoldsIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- Kinney v. HookerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1892
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.