Mahan v. Clark
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 93, Oct. T., 1907, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. Cambria Co., June T., 1905, No. 275, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Isaac Mahan v. H. E. Clark and S. T. Schrack. Replevin to determine ownership of logs and manufactured lumber. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Yerdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appealed. Error assigned among others was in refusing binding instructions for defendants.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Elkin,
Mahan, the owner of the soil, by a contract in writing sold and conveyed to Kramer “ all the timber lying and standing down to eight inches across the stump two feet from the *231ground ” on two certain tracts of land therein described. The agreement was entered into November 16, 1899. Kramer was given the right of egress and regress over the land for the purpose of cutting, manufacturing and removing the timber and lumber. He was also given the right to locate and operate at a suitable place on the tracts of land a sawmill for the purpose of manufacturing the timber…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Owens v. LewisIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- Johnson v. TruittSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Golden v. GlockWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
- Macomber v. Detroit, Lansing & Northern RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Miller v. ZufallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Edgcomb v. CloughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Havens v. PearsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Lancaster v. RothCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913
- Austin v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Dead River Co. v. Assessors of HoultonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1953
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.