Barnes v. Burt
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Trespass qu. cl. for entering the plaintiffs’ land, and removing the curb and fixtures oí a well; brought to a justice of the peace, appealed to the Court of Common Pleas, and tried on the general issue closed to the jury, before Brewster, J. Yerdict for the plaintiffs, and motion for new trial by the defendant for error in the rulings and charge of the court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
The defendant deeded the' locus in quo to Sarah Nichols, one of the plaintiffs’ grantors, and inserted in the deed, after the description of the premises, the following words: “ reserving to myself the use of the well in the highway‘in front of said land.” -The principal question in the case relates to the construction of this clause. The court below instructed the jury that it was a reservation, and not an exception.
It is not always easy to determine which was intended by the parties. The language employed is not the only criterion. The word “reserving” is often construed as creating an…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Waterbury Petroleum Products, Inc. v. Canaan Oil & Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Snoddy v. BolenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Lange v. WatersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Chappell v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1892
- Bolan v. Avalon Farms Property Owners Ass'nSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.