Legal Opinion

Bean v. Dow

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 2, 1930PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeaslee, C. J.

A right of the plaintiff to use the defendant’s wall, and to insist that it remain in place so that she could use it, must rest in some agreement of the owners of the respective premises. Everett v. Edwards, 149 Mass. 588; 20 R. C. L. 1084. Such agreement is sought to be implied from the situation existing when the common owner conveyed the printing office to the defendant. The claim of the plaintiff is that because of that situation this structure became a party wall when the titles to the two buildings were severed.

One distinctive feature of a party wall is that the adjacent buildings are…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Partridge v. . Gilbert and OthersNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
  2. Campbell v. MesierNew York Court of Chancery · 1819
  3. Heartt v. . KrugerNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  4. Cherry v. BrizzolaraSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
  5. Everett v. EdwardsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Blaisdell v. RaabSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1990
  2. Plastic Laminated Products, Inc. v. SeppalaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1975
  3. Wait v. NewmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Waterman Steamship Corporation v. McGill InstituteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1961

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API