Sweetland v. Stetson

115 Mass. 49, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 143
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided March 18, 1874·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

This is an action between the owners of adjacent lots of land. Each has as much land as her deed calls for. The controversy is as to a strip one foot wide on which the fence between the two lots stands. To whom this belongs depends upon the application of the description in the deeds to the land. It is true that the boundary upon the land of a third person makes that land a monument, but where the monument is is a question of fact. The judge of the Superior Court has found as facts that the defendant proved no title to the strip in question, and that the plaintiff was in possession thereof. His finding was based partly on the testimony of witnesses, and depends upon their credibility. The bill of exceptions presents pure questions oi [50]*50fact, on which the decision of the court below is final. No title in either party being proved, the plaintiff’s possession is sufficient to maintain this action. Exceptions overruled.

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

Sweetland v. Stetson, 115 Mass. 49, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 143 (Mass. 1874).

115 Mass. 49 (Sweetland v. Stetson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Uliasz v. Gillette
256 N.E.2d 290 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1970)
Anderson v. Todesca
100 N.E. 1068 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1913)
Holden v. Lynn
1911 OK 503 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1911)
Kunkel v. Utah Lumber Co.
81 P. 897 (Utah Supreme Court, 1905)
Fowler v. Owen
39 A. 329 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1895)
Nickerson v. Thacher
16 N.E. 581 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1888)
Colton v. Onderdonk
10 P. 398 (California Supreme Court, 1886)
Ames v. McCamber
124 Mass. 85 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1878)
Hoar v. Goulding
116 Mass. 132 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1874)