Jones v. Smith
New York Supreme Court
Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment dismissing the complaint. The action was one of ejectment and was brought by Dudley H. Jones against Elbert 0. Smith, to recover a strip of land, about twenty rods wide and seventy rods long, situated in the county of Essex. Subsequent to the trial said Dudley H. Jones died, and ■Edwin L. Jones and others, his heirs at law and personal representatives, Were substituted as plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment dismissing the complaint. The action was one of ejectment and was brought by Dudley H. Jones against Elbert 0. Smith, to recover a strip of land, about twenty rods wide and seventy rods long, situated in the county of Essex. Subsequent to the trial said Dudley H. Jones died, and ■Edwin L. Jones and others, his heirs at law and personal representatives, Were substituted as plaintiffs. The original plaintiff and the defendant were owners of adjoining farms; the plaintiff on the west, and the defendant on the east. The true line .between them was the patent…
1Opinion of the CourtBockes, J.
The true line between the farms was intended to be, and was in fact, the dividing line between the Montressor and the Ross patents. The first deed put in evidence by the plaintiff, dated March 16th, 1830, bounded his lot on the east by that line; and this patent line was ever after, in all the conveyances including the one to the plaintiff in 1845, recognized as the true line. AH the deeds declared the patent Hne to be the east boundary of the plaintiff’s farm. There was an implication, too, in the deeds, at least in four out of six, that this true line had not been, at the time they were…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Reed v. . FarrNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Hubbell v. McCullochNew York Supreme Court · 1866
- Van Rensselaer v. VickeryNew York Supreme Court · 1870