Camp v. Whitman
New Jersey Court of Chancery
Final hearing on bill, answer and proofs in open court. The parties hereto are owners of adjoining lots of land, and the object of the bill is to establish a right in the complainant, .as such owner, to a carriage and wagonway from her lot across the lot of the defendant to the public highway, and to have the same designated upon the ground.
Read the full summary
Final hearing on bill, answer and proofs in open court. The parties hereto are owners of adjoining lots of land, and the object of the bill is to establish a right in the complainant, .as such owner, to a carriage and wagonway from her lot across the lot of the defendant to the public highway, and to have the same designated upon the ground. The facts are that, at and prior to the 1st of March, 1889, the -defendant Mrs. Whitman was the owner of a plot of land situate in Bloomfield, Essex county, New Jersey, on the north side of Belleville avenue, having a frontage on said street of one…
1Opinion of the Court
Pitney, V. C.
Complainant rests her right, first, upon the familiar doctrine •of a way of necessity, and, second, upon the affirmation in her deed that the lot so conveyed did front upon Broad street.
The defendant insists that the facts show a present footway .along the easterly edge of the park strip from Belleville avenue to the complainant’s land, and that such a way satisfies the element of necessity. To this complainant replies that, under the •circumstances, she is entitled to a right of way for wheeled vehicles, and further, that the footway is not established in law ■by the evidence.
Tha…
2Cited by5 opinions
- William Dahm Realty Corp. v. CardelNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1940
- Cyril E. Smith v. Vivian DefreitasCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1964
- GEORGE VAN TASSEL'S, ETC. v. Town of BloomfieldNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
- Boylan v. Loy Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1941
- Cale v. WanamakerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1972