Loring v. Norton
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Tins was an action of trespass quare clausum fregit, for cutting jrees upon the plaintiff’s, being the southeasterly half of lot No. 68, and the southwesterly lialf of lot marked (t¿, in JYorridgewoclc. Tiie title of the plaintiff was derived under a grant from the proprietors of the Kenneb ec purchase, in which the lots were described as lots 68 and (Sj), according to a plan made by Thomas Farrington in 1774,” without further description.
Read the full summary
Tins was an action of trespass quare clausum fregit, for cutting jrees upon the plaintiff’s, being the southeasterly half of lot No. 68, and the southwesterly lialf of lot marked (t¿, in JYorridgewoclc. Tiie title of the plaintiff was derived under a grant from the proprietors of the Kenneb ec purchase, in which the lots were described as lots 68 and (Sj), according to a plan made by Thomas Farrington in 1774,” without further description. A copy of this plan, which was certified by the surveyor to have been made by a scale of one mile to an indi, and of the survey made in this case by order…
1Opinion of the Court
Parris J.
delivered the opinion of the Court at the ensuing June term in Washington.
*65The only description of lots 68 and Q. in the conveyance under which the plaintiff claims, is a reference to Farrington’s plan. The deed -contains neither courses, distances or monuments.
We must, therefore, have recourse to the pian to ascertain the boundaries of these lots, and whatever of description may be found there will have the same effect, in the decision of this 'action, as if actually inserted in the body of the original deed.
Farrington having run no rear or side lines, their exact positioR on the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Davies v. WickstromWashington Supreme Court · 1909
- Stadin v. HelinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899