Jenks v. Morgan
This text of 72 Mass. 448 (Jenks v. Morgan) 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 construction given to that part of the deed to William Knight which describes the easterly boundary of the plaintiff’s close was clearly right. It is a well established rule of interpretation, that where a line is given in a deed, to be run from one landmark to another, it must be deemed to be a straight one, unless a different line is described in the deed. Allen v. Kingsbury, 16 Pick. 235. In the present case, the easterly boundary was not to be run by monuments to be erected by the parties, but it was to be established at a fixed and designated distance from the landmarks named in the deed, and was to run as a north and south line between the points thus named. It could not be deflected, consistently with this description, from a straight line between these points. Such being the legal construction of the deed, it could not be varied by the acts and conduct of the parties at the time of or subsequent to the date of the grant. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
72 Mass. 448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jenks-v-morgan-mass-1856.