Urch v. Rand

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Urch v. Rand

94 A. 200, 77 N.H. 603, 1915 N.H. LEXIS 39

DecidedMay 4, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 94 A. 200 (Urch v. Rand) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Urch v. Rand, 94 A. 200, 77 N.H. 603, 1915 N.H. LEXIS 39 (N.H. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Parsons, C. J.

The plaintiff’s evidence tends to prove his possession of the tract of flats upon which the defendant trespassed. Possession is sufficient evidence of the right of possession in issue in trespass quare clausum, in the absence of proof of title in the defendant. The facts, if established, that the premises may be entirely covered by tidewater and that the plaintiff does not own the adjoining upland, do not conclusively controvert the plaintiff’s possession or establish the defendant’s title.

Exception sustained.

All concurred.

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

Parsons, C. J.

The plaintiff’s evidence tends to prove his possession of the tract of flats upon which the defendant trespassed. Possession is sufficient evidence of the right of possession in issue in trespass quare clausum, in the absence of proof of title in the defendant. The facts, if established, that the premises may be entirely covered by tidewater and that the plaintiff does not own the adjoining upland, do not conclusively controvert the plaintiff’s possession or establish the defendant’s title.

Exception sustained.

All concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 A. 200, 77 N.H. 603, 1915 N.H. LEXIS 39, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/urch-v-rand-nh-1915.