Rand v. Symonds

112 A. 902, 120 Me. 126, 1921 Me. LEXIS 22
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedMarch 30, 1921
StatusPublished

This text of 112 A. 902 (Rand v. Symonds) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rand v. Symonds, 112 A. 902, 120 Me. 126, 1921 Me. LEXIS 22 (Me. 1921).

Opinion

Philbrook, J.

This is a real action, wherein the plaintiff demands possession of certain real estate situate in the town of Cape Elizabeth. She describes the land in her declaration as follows:

“A certain piece or parcel of land situate in Cape Elizabeth, aforesaid, known as the ‘Little Marsh Lot/ containing 6 acres and 106 square rods, be it more or less. It one-third part of Twenty acres conveyed by Joshua Woodbury to Joshua Woodbury, by his deed dated April 1, A. D. 1748 (duly recorded) and by Tobias Pillsbury, et als., to the said Hannah E. Rand, by deed dated April 18, A. D. 1864 (duly recorded) and more particularly shown on plan of James Johnson made in June 1863 as follows: Beginning at a point on said plan, designated and shown as ‘marked Hemlock Tree’ thence southerly about twelve rods to a point marked by a pile of stones, being the northwesterly corner of a lot sold by Watson C. Rand to Joseph W. Symonds; thence, easterly at about right angles to last described line, eighty-seven and one-half rods, more or less, to a point in land now of the defendant; thence, northerly at about right angles to last described course, by line of said defendant’s land, twelve rods, more or less, to a point shown on the said Johnson plan as ‘marked spruce tree/ thence westerly at about right angles to last described course, eighty-seven and one-half rods, more or less, to said hemlock tree and point of beginning; being the lot shown on said Johnson plan as ‘Mr. Pillsbury’s lot/ said lot now being bounded northerly by other land of the said plaintiff and of Susan Davis; westerly by other land of the said plaintiff; easterly and southerly by land of the said defendant.”

The accompanying sketch may be of assistance in demonstrating the situation according to the claims of the parties as we are able to gather them from the record and the arguments of counsel.

The land in controversy is the rectangle HDEI, marked “Pillsbury Land,” which plaintiff claims both by record title and by adverse possession.

[128]*128

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 A. 902, 120 Me. 126, 1921 Me. LEXIS 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rand-v-symonds-me-1921.