Shelton Logging Co. v. Gosser

66 P. 151, 26 Wash. 126, 1901 Wash. LEXIS 618
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 13, 1901
DocketNo. 3842
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 66 P. 151 (Shelton Logging Co. v. Gosser) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shelton Logging Co. v. Gosser, 66 P. 151, 26 Wash. 126, 1901 Wash. LEXIS 618 (Wash. 1901).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

White, J.

The evidence in this case is not brought up with the record. The facts appear from the pleadings and findings. On the 12th of December, 1896, the state of Washington contracted to sell to Ellis & Keed tide lands described as follows:

[127]*127“All the tide lands lying in front of, adjacent to, or abutting on lots numbered 2 and 3, section 2, township 20 north, of range 3 west, Willamette meridian.”

It appears by the findings that the plat of the survey of lot 2 returned by the surveyor general to the general land office bounds lot 2 on the water side as follows:

“Beginning at the meander corner to sections 2 and 35 on the north boundary of township 20 N., R. 3 west, W. M., which corner is 5.00 chs. west of standard corner, to sections 35 and 36, T. 21 N., R. 3 west; thence with meanders in section 2, S., 491/2 deg. E., 2.60 chs.; S., 72 deg. E., 7.40 chs.; N., 77 deg. E., 3.40 chs.; S., 25 deg. E.. 4.39 chs.; S., 51 deg. W., 2.46 chs.; S., 49 deg. W., 3.14 chs.; S., 37 deg. W., 8.05 chs.; S., 49 deg. W., 3.39 chs.; S., 40 deg. W., 3.95 chs.”

This contract, by assignment, became the property of the appellant. The assignors of the appellant, under said contract, entered into possession of the property contracted to be sold about the time the contract was made, and the appellant and its assignors have ever since used the same for booming purposes in connection with logging operations.- Part of such booming works has been upon that portion of the land shown by the shaded surface between lines 3 — 4, 4 — 7, 7 — 8, and 8 — 3 in the annexed plat. Over this the tide regularly ebbs and flows. The following is a plat of said lot 2:

[128]*128

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

Related

Magart v. Fierce
666 P.2d 386 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1983)
Turner v. Rowland
468 P.2d 702 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1970)
Hughes v. State
410 P.2d 20 (Washington Supreme Court, 1966)
City of Centralia v. Miller
197 P.2d 244 (Washington Supreme Court, 1948)
Nord v. Nord
282 N.W. 507 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1938)
Rohrbach v. Sanstrom
20 P.2d 28 (Washington Supreme Court, 1933)
Matthews v. Parker
299 P. 354 (Washington Supreme Court, 1931)
Bartlett v. Hoshor
298 P. 1057 (Washington Supreme Court, 1931)
Borgeson v. Tubb
172 P. 326 (Montana Supreme Court, 1918)
Holthoff v. Freudenthal
162 P. 173 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1916)
Davis v. Crump
123 P. 294 (California Supreme Court, 1912)
Brodsky v. Nelson
107 P. 840 (Washington Supreme Court, 1910)
Kraus v. Congdon
161 F. 18 (Ninth Circuit, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 P. 151, 26 Wash. 126, 1901 Wash. LEXIS 618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shelton-logging-co-v-gosser-wash-1901.