Maunsell v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Maunsell v. Brown

11 A.D.2d 1039, 207 N.Y.S.2d 964, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7863

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 10, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 11 A.D.2d 1039 (Maunsell v. Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Maunsell v. Brown, 11 A.D.2d 1039, 207 N.Y.S.2d 964, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7863 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to establish a boundary between adjoining parcels of land, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Rock-land County, rendered February 29, I960, in favor of plaintiffs, after a nonjury trial, adjudging that they are the owners of a gore between the respective lands of the parties. Judgment affirmed on the facts, with costs. No opinion. The following new findings of fact are made: that the northerly boundary of the parcel conveyed to Clifton Stiles constitutes the basis of the measurements in the conveyance to Ella Limper, and that the southerly line of Huschle’s premises is marked by the stone wall which is delineated on the drawing of witness Tuda as the northerly boundary of parcel No. 1. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to establish a boundary between adjoining parcels of land, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Rock-land County, rendered February 29, I960, in favor of plaintiffs, after a nonjury trial, adjudging that they are the owners of a gore between the respective lands of the parties. Judgment affirmed on the facts, with costs. No opinion. The following new findings of fact are made: that the northerly boundary of the parcel conveyed to Clifton Stiles constitutes the basis of the measurements in the conveyance to Ella Limper, and that the southerly line of Huschle’s premises is marked by the stone wall which is delineated on the drawing of witness Tuda as the northerly boundary of parcel No. 1. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.2d 1039, 207 N.Y.S.2d 964, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7863, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maunsell-v-brown-nyappdiv-1960.