Stanwood v. Peirce
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of trespass, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close, situate in Brunswick, in this county, and cutting down his trees, subverting his soil, &c. The action was submitted without argument to the opinion of the Court, as to a part of the trespass charged, upon a case stated. The facts in the case will be found recited by the Court in their opinion, as the same was delivered at this term by
1Opinion of the CourtParsons, C. J.
That part of the trespass which, by the facts agreed, is submitted to our decision, the defendant justifies as agent of “ The Bath Bridge and Turnpike Corporation,” in making a turnpike road, located by the Court of Sessions; and if this road is to be considered, in this action, as legally located, the justification is sufficient and legal.
* This corporation was created by the statute of 1804, [ * 459 ] c. 110, for the purpose, among others, “of laying out and making a turnpike road from Bowdoin College, in Brunswick, to the new meeting-house in Bath, upon as straight a line as circumstances…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Jones v. EricksonMontana Supreme Court · 1926
- Hyman v. ReadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Proprietors of the Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of the Warren BridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1837
- Proprietors of the Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of the Warren BridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1837