Mercedes Dickerson v. Arthur Hodge

Third Circuit

Mercedes Dickerson v. Arthur Hodge

407 F.2d 848, 7 V.I. 13

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided March 10, 1969·No. 17554_1·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment for the plaintiff in a suit brought to settle the location of the boundary line between Lots 9 and 8A Adel Gade in King’s Quarter of the town of Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, owned, respectively, by the plaintiff and the defendant. The district court reviewed the facts and concluded that the true boundary between the lots was that contended for by the plaintiff and shown on a survey plan dated November 3, 1956, prepared by Sidney Baptiste, surveyor. We find ourselves in complete accord with the findings and conclusions of the district court as stated in its opinion to which we need add nothing.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment for the plaintiff in a suit brought to settle the location of the boundary line between Lots 9 and 8A Adel Gade in King’s Quarter of the town of Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, owned, respectively, by the plaintiff and the defendant. The district court reviewed the facts and concluded that the true boundary between the lots was that contended for by the plaintiff and shown on a survey plan dated November 3, 1956, prepared by Sidney Baptiste, surveyor. We find ourselves in complete accord with the findings and conclusions of the district court as stated in its opinion to which we need add nothing.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

Mercedes Dickerson v. Arthur Hodge, 407 F.2d 848, 7 V.I. 13 (3d Cir. 1969).

Pincite

407 F.2d 848 (Mercedes Dickerson v. Arthur Hodge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related