Hodge v. Boothby
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions to the ruling of Goodenow, J. Trespass, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close and hauling away gravel and stones. The general issue was pleaded, with a brief statement justifying the acts done, “under grant and reservation.”
Read the full summary
On Exceptions to the ruling of Goodenow, J. Trespass, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close and hauling away gravel and stones. The general issue was pleaded, with a brief statement justifying the acts done, “under grant and reservation.” The plaintiff introduced a deed to himself from Thomas Boothby, of the locus in quo, containing the following clause: “ Reserving to Samuel Boothby a right to cross and re-cross said lot to his field, as he has heretofore done, by shutting gates and bars; and also reserving to said Samuel Boothby a right to cross said lot to the beach, and take and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Mat, J.
If the acts of the defendant, as shown by the evidence, were no infringement of the rights of the plaintiff, the nonsuit was rightly directed. Whether they were so or not, depends upon the construction of the deed from Thomas Boothby to the plaintiff, dated September 15th, 1857. By that deed the plaintiff became seized of the premises described in his writ, subject to the easement, whatever it may be, which was carved out of the estate by the following words contained in the deed immediately after the description of the lot, namely — “Reserving…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Willard v. First Church of Christ, ScientistCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- R. M. Cobban Realty Co. v. DonlanMontana Supreme Court · 1915
- Fitanides v. HolmanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1973
- State Ex Rel. Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control v. PhillipsCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1979
- Robert F. Almeder v. Town of KennebunkportSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2019
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.