Hicks v. Fish
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island
Trespass quaere clausum fregit [by Weston Hicks against Richard Fish]. Plea, that the locus in quo was a highway in Tiverton. Replication, traversing the fact of its being a highway and issue thereon. At the trial it appeared in evidence, that the proprietors of Tiverton, on the 11th of April, 1781, ordered lots of land to be laid out into convenient ways, &c.
Read the full summary
Trespass quaere clausum fregit [by Weston Hicks against Richard Fish]. Plea, that the locus in quo was a highway in Tiverton. Replication, traversing the fact of its being a highway and issue thereon. At the trial it appeared in evidence, that the proprietors of Tiverton, on the 11th of April, 1781, ordered lots of land to be laid out into convenient ways, &c. In July, 1794, the proprietors appointed a committee to lay out ways, and make partition of lots, ways to be reserved. The committee so appointed afterwards laid out certain ways, and made partition of lots. In the record of the report…
1Opinion of the CourtStory, Circuit Justice
(summing up to-the jury). The court are dear that the highway was not originally laid out by the committee beyond the Great Pine Swamp. Up to that place, it had sufficient certainty of description and location. Beyond that the road was to be in the most convenient way to the highway at the north end of Little Pond. Now a highway cannot be legally created by such a description as this. It must have some definite location and boundaries. It is not sufficient to say, that it shall be in the most convenient direction; that direction must be actually fixed, before it has an existence as a highway.…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Almy v. ChurchSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1893
- Cleveland & Toledo Railroad v. PrenticeOhio Supreme Court · 1862
- Hinckley v. HastingsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1824
- Greeley v. QuimbySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1851