Hoar v. Goulding

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Hoar v. Goulding

116 Mass. 132, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 42

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedOctober 8, 1874

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 116 Mass. 132 (Hoar v. Goulding) 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.

Bluebook

Hoar v. Goulding, 116 Mass. 132, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 42 (Mass. 1874).

Pincite

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

The question whether the railroad, mentioned as a boundary in the deed sued on, was the strip of land owned by the railroad corporation, according to the original location and the apparent occupation, or according to the present legal title, was a latent ambiguity, requiring extrinsic evidence to apply it. Putnam v. Bond, 100 Mass. 58. The judgment of the Superior Court, involving a decision of that question of fact, is therefore conclusive. Backus v. Chapman, 111 Mass. 386. Sweetland v. Stetson, 115 Mass. 49. Exceptions overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Gray, C. J.

The question whether the railroad, mentioned as a boundary in the deed sued on, was the strip of land owned by the railroad corporation, according to the original location and the apparent occupation, or according to the present legal title, was a latent ambiguity, requiring extrinsic evidence to apply it. Putnam v. Bond, 100 Mass. 58. The judgment of the Superior Court, involving a decision of that question of fact, is therefore conclusive. Backus v. Chapman, 111 Mass. 386. Sweetland v. Stetson, 115 Mass. 49. Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 Mass. 132, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoar-v-goulding-mass-1874.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack