Miles Land Co. v. Hudson Coal Co.

91 A. 1061, 246 Pa. 11, 1914 Pa. LEXIS 467
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJuly 1, 1914
DocketAppeal, No. 335
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 91 A. 1061 (Miles Land Co. v. Hudson Coal Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Miles Land Co. v. Hudson Coal Co., 91 A. 1061, 246 Pa. 11, 1914 Pa. LEXIS 467 (Pa. 1914).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Whether the Lackawanna river was a call of senior surveys and a boundary line of the land in dispute was submitted to the jury and their verdict was for the plaintiff. A different finding would have established conclusively the defendant’s right and have entitled it to judgment in its favor. On its motion for judgment non obstante veredicto the court properly held that the question was one of construction. What are boundaries is a matter of law for the court to be determined by construction of the deed or survey; where they are is a question of fact for the jury. We are not convinced of error in the conclusion reached that the surveys called for the river as a boundary and we affirm the judgment entered in the Common Pleas for the reasons stated in thq, opinion of Judge Johnson, specially presiding at the trial.

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

Related

Miller, R. v. Bunting, R.
2025 Pa. Super. 80 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2025)
Starling v. Lake Meade Property Owners Ass'n
162 A.3d 327 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2017)
Starling, W. v. Lake Meade Prop., Aplt.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2017
Will v. PIPER
134 A.2d 41 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1957)
Koontz v. Commonwealth
70 A.2d 308 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1950)
Pittsburgh Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Surowski
64 A.2d 854 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1948)
Matthews v. Bagnik
41 A.2d 875 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1945)
Lenihan v. Davis Et Ux.
31 A.2d 434 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1943)
Girard Trust Co. v. Dixon
6 A.2d 813 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1939)
Newcomer, Admrx. v. S. Fayette C. Co.
176 A. 228 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1934)
Newcomer v. South Fayette Coke Co.
17 Pa. D. & C. 644 (Fayette County Court, 1932)
Parran v. Wilson
154 A. 449 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1931)
Muia v. Herskovitz
128 A. 828 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1925)
Hutchison v. Little Four Oil & Gas Co.
119 A. 534 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1923)
Donaldson v. Fellabaum
68 Pa. Super. 347 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1917)
Over v. Lindsay
99 A. 805 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
91 A. 1061, 246 Pa. 11, 1914 Pa. LEXIS 467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miles-land-co-v-hudson-coal-co-pa-1914.