Rowley v. Doe e. d. Carpenter
Indiana Supreme Court
ERROR to the Yanderburg Circuit Court. This was an action of ejectment in which the plaintiff below succeeded. The only question in the case, was, whether the blocks in the Lower, or McGary's Enlargement, of Evansville, are eighteen poles square, or eighteen poles one way, by eighteen poles and eighteen links, the other. That question depended on the construction to be given to the plat of .paid Enlargement, as made by Me Gary, the proprietor.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Yanderburg Circuit Court. This was an action of ejectment in which the plaintiff below succeeded. The only question in the case, was, whether the blocks in the Lower, or McGary's Enlargement, of Evansville, are eighteen poles square, or eighteen poles one way, by eighteen poles and eighteen links, the other. That question depended on the construction to be given to the plat of .paid Enlargement, as made by Me Gary, the proprietor. The specifications annexed to the plat were as follows: “ This Enlargement of Evansville is laid out agreeably to the origi-Tied plan, except the…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
— “ The Court below appears to have held upon the trial that the Enlargement was intended to correspond with the original plan of the city, as to the size of the blocks, notwithstanding the specification in the videlicet, that they are to be eighteen poles square. From an examination of both plats and the specifications accompanying them, we think it may be fairly inferred that such wap the intention of the proprietor, and as the Court below has so determined, we shall not disturb the judgment.”
Judgment affirmed, &c.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Welby v. ArmstrongIndiana Supreme Court · 1863