Lessee of Sperry v. Pond
Ohio Supreme Court
This was an ejectment tried on the last circuit, in Trumbull county. A verdict was found for the plaintiff, and a motion made by the defendant for a new trial, which was reserved for decision here. *It was proved on the trial that Sperry, the lessor, was seized'in fee of a tract of land through which Mill creek flows, in the county of Trumbull.
Read the full summary
This was an ejectment tried on the last circuit, in Trumbull county. A verdict was found for the plaintiff, and a motion made by the defendant for a new trial, which was reserved for decision here. *It was proved on the trial that Sperry, the lessor, was seized'in fee of a tract of land through which Mill creek flows, in the county of Trumbull. That being so seized, he, on September 10, 1817, by .a deed duly executed, for good consideration, granted to Isaac Clark, his heirs and assigns, the privilege of erecting on the said tract of land a grist and saw-mill, with any other machinery…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Collet
delivered the opinion of the court:
When the first deed was made, it was not known where the mills would be erected; when the last deed was executed this was ascertained. By it an acre of land, described by motes and bounds, including the mills and yards and privileges conveyed by the first, was conveyed to Clark, his heirs and assigns, to be occupied by them “so long” as they kept a sáw-mill and grist-mill, doing business on the premises, “ and no longer.” After .the execution of this deed the premises were held according to its terms; if they vary from the terms of the first…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Smith v. BarrieMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- First New Jerusalem Church v. SingerOhio Court of Appeals · 1941
- Burdette v. JonesTuscarawas County Court of Common Pleas · 1947