Jackson ex dem. Schuyler v. Vedder
New York Supreme Court
THIS was ah action of ejectment, for lot no. 102, in Klock and Nellis’s patent, in the town of Palatine, in Montgomery county. The cause was tried, the 3d October, 1806, at the Montgomery circuit, before Mr. Chief Justice Kent. The defendant admitted, that the lessors of the plaintiff, were owners of lot no. 102; and the plaintiff admitted, that the defendant was owner of lot no. 101, in the patent.
Read the full summary
THIS was ah action of ejectment, for lot no. 102, in Klock and Nellis’s patent, in the town of Palatine, in Montgomery county. The cause was tried, the 3d October, 1806, at the Montgomery circuit, before Mr. Chief Justice Kent. The defendant admitted, that the lessors of the plaintiff, were owners of lot no. 102; and the plaintiff admitted, that the defendant was owner of lot no. 101, in the patent. The patent was granted, the 2d December, 1754, to George Klock, William Nellis, and fourteen other persons. On the part of the plaintiff, Jacob G. Klock, a witness, produced a map, and proved,…
1Per curiam
Upon the consideration of this case, we are of opinion, that the motion on the part of the plaintiff be denied. The partition on the map was reduced to practice, by the actual survey of Henry Frey, soon after it was made. That survey was made for the proprietors, and if possessions have been taken and held accordingly, the proprietors, and those claiming under tjiem, ought certainly, after a lapse of forty years, to be concluded from contesting with each other, the correctness of the actual locations. It was a matter of fact left to the jury, whether the lines of that ancient' survey, were…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Baldwin v. . BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Brown v. ChaneySupreme Court of Georgia · 1846
- Rockwell v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Hubbell v. McCullochNew York Supreme Court · 1866
- Cramer v. BentonNew York Supreme Court · 1873
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.