Anderson v. Cox
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Dubuque Circuit Court. Action to recover the sum of four dollars, alleged to have been paid by the plaintiff to the township trustees for their services as fence viewers. The plaintiff and defendant reside in the town of Peosta, and each is the owner of certain lots .in that town. The lots owned by the plaintiff are separated from those owned by the defendant by a public alley. The plaintiff built a fence along the line of her lots adjacent to the alley.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Dubuque Circuit Court. Action to recover the sum of four dollars, alleged to have been paid by the plaintiff to the township trustees for their services as fence viewers. The plaintiff and defendant reside in the town of Peosta, and each is the owner of certain lots .in that town. The lots owned by the plaintiff are separated from those owned by the defendant by a public alley. The plaintiff built a fence along the line of her lots adjacent to the alley. The defendant built across the alley so as to enjoy the benefit of the fence built by the plaintiff. Sometime afterward she…
1Opinion of the Court
Adams, Oh. J.
1. FENCES: partition tiais oí. The question certified is dn these words: “ Whether a party who fences across a public alley in a village, connecting with and using the fence on the other ° ° side by doing so makes it a partition fence, and can be made to pay for the use of the same, and whether the township trustees had any jurisdiction in the matter.”
The fence viewers have jurisdiction only when a controversy arises between the respective owners of land about partition fences. Code § 1492. Peschongs v. Mueller, 50 Iowa, 237.
The plaintiff’s land did not join the defendant’s. The…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Peschongs v. MuellerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1878
3Cited by2 opinions
- Sinnott v. District Court of Clarke CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1926
- Nichols v. FierceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927