Draper v. Varnerin
This text of 107 N.E. 350 (Draper v. Varnerin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The excavations and changes in grade which the defendant has made in the way, where he had only an easement of passage and the right to make reasonable repairs, having altered to the plaintiff’s injury and damage the way as constructed by her with the consent of the defendant’s predecessor in title, the cross bill was properly dismissed, and the decree restraining any further encroachments and ordering the defendant to restore the way in so far as possible to its original condition should be affirmed with costs. Killion v. Kelley, 120 Mass. 47. Lipsky v. Heller, 199 Mass. 310. Cornell-Andrews Smelting Co. v. Boston & Providence [71]*71Railroad, 202 Mass. 585. Kaatz v. Curtis, 215 Mass. 311. Downey v. H. P. Hood & Sons, 203 Mass. 4, 11. Szathmary v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 214 Mass. 42.
Ordered accordingly.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
107 N.E. 350, 220 Mass. 67, 1914 Mass. LEXIS 1571, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/draper-v-varnerin-mass-1914.