Kent v. Taylor
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, for use and occupation of a portion of the bed of Newfound river upon which the defendants’ grantors, in 1868, constructed a canal.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, for use and occupation of a portion of the bed of Newfound river upon which the defendants’ grantors, in 1868, constructed a canal. In 1804, Moses Lewis, owning the land on both sides of the river, conveyed to James Martin, under whom the defendants claim, “ about forty-four square rods of land, being a part of the lot No. 61 in the first division of lots in New Chester and Bridgewater bounded as follows viz.: Beginning four feet and six inches south of the south-easterly corner of my corn-barn and thence north 85° east six rods and seven links to a stake and stones; thence south…
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
Land describecj in a deed as bounded on the bank of a river not navigable, or by lines x-unning to a stake or tree standing on the bank, and thence up, down, on, or by the river to another monument on the bank, extends to the thread of the stream. The doctrine is founded on the presumption that such was the intention and understaxxding of the parties. The mere fact that the distances and the quantity of land conveyed are greater under this construction than those named in the deed is xxot sufficient to overcome the presumption. Rix v. Johnson, 5 N. H. 520 ; State v. Canterbury, 28 N. H. 195,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- County of St. Clair v. LovingstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Gould v. Eastern RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886
3Cited by5 opinions
- Sizor v. City of LogansportIndiana Supreme Court · 1898
- Fowler v. KentSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1902
- Holmes v. HainesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
- Kerr v. FeeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Korroll v. Trustees of School District No. 24Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1928