Woods v. West

56 N.W. 30, 37 Neb. 400, 1893 Neb. LEXIS 228
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedJune 30, 1893
DocketNo. 4181
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 56 N.W. 30 (Woods v. West) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Woods v. West, 56 N.W. 30, 37 Neb. 400, 1893 Neb. LEXIS 228 (Neb. 1893).

Opinion

Maxwell, Ch. J.

' This is an action of ejectment brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error to recover the. possession of about ten*acres of land. There is an evident mistake in the description in the petition, and on the trial the parties stipulated as follows:

“It is hereby stipulated by and between the parties plaintiff and defendant in this action that the title to the southeast quarter of section 8, town 1, range 21, is in the plaintiff Daniel P. West, and that the north half of the northeast quarter of section 17, town 1, range 21, is in the defendant Mary C. Woods. That if the jury find the original government corner to be at the corner known as ‘The Phoebus Corner/ that they shall find for the plaintiff; if they find that the corner is at or near the comer known as ‘ The Hasty Comer or Worthington Corner/ they shall then find for the defendant; and that if they find for the plaintiff, the amount of the damages shall be one dollar.”

The right of the defendant in error to the land in question rests upon the accuracy of a survey made by one Phoebus, and of the plaintiff in error on the surveys of Hasty and Worthington. Phoebus, on cross-examination, testifies as follows:

Q. You say you surveyed to this corner three times only?

A. Yes, sir.

[402]*402Q. What were you surveying the first time.

A. Section 4.

Q,. You run a line from the southwest corner of section 4 to this corner in dispute at that time, did you ?

Q. Survey any part of section 8 or 9 at that time?
A. Not until after I was done with section 4.

Q. For what purpose did you run the line between sections 8 and 9 to the corner in dispute? .

A. At the corner of 4, 5, 8, and 9 there were two corners. I run a mile north and a mile south to determine which was the correct córner.

Q. Did you lócate the corner at tl^t time — at. the corner of 4, 5, 8, and 9?
A. I did not.
Q. Did you locate one of these corners as the correct corner ?
A. Yes, sir; I took the south corner as being the correct corner.

Q. How far from this corner of 4, 5, 8, and 9 is this-south corner of 4, 5, 8, and 9 to the corner in dispute, the one you recognized as the government corner?

A. I haven’t the first measurement, but I afterwardsmeasured it on the survey of section 9.

Q. What was the distance at that time, if you recollect?
A. Eighty-one chains and thirty-one links.

Q,. How far was the corner you recognized to 4, 5, 8,. and 9 south of the corner marked there?

A. About four chains.

Q,. You had started at the north one of these two corners and run south the distance that you made from the south corner to the corner of 16, 17, 8, and 9, you would have come nearer the corner you recognized there or the corner known as “The Hasty Corner”?

A. I measured in both directions from the corner of 4,. 5, 8, and 9 — both north and south.

[403]*403Q,. I will ask the question in a different form. Is not the distance between the two corners at the corner of 4, 5, 8, and 9 north and south about the same as the distance between the corner you recognized to 16,17, 8, and 9 and the Hasty corner?

A. It is not quite so much.
Q. About how much does it lack of being the same?
A. I think about a chain less,

Q,. How much?

A. About a chain.
Q. The second time you were there, what were you surveying ?
A. Section 9. >
Q. When was that?
A. 1887.

Q,. When did you survey section 8 or the southeast quarter of section 8 ?

A. 1888.
Q. Where did you begin at the time you surveyed that?
A. At the southeast corner.
Q. Then where did you run ?
A. I ran west.
Q. How far ?
A. A mile.
Q. Did you run directly a mile ?
A. I closed on the quarter section corner and then ran west another half mile.
Q. Did you run on the variations given in the government field notes ?
A. I did not; I ran a straight line from corner to corner.

Q,. Then where did you run from the quarter corner between 8 and 17?

Q. How far — to what point?
A. To the section corner.

[404]*404Q. Then you run north to the first quarter corner ?

■ A. Yes, sir; between 7 and 8.

Q. Then east?
A. East across section 8.

Q,. Did you close there?

Q. Then you closed at the quarter corner between 8 and 9?

Q,. Then where did you commence ?

A. I began at the quarter section corner between 8 and 17 and ran north across the section.

Q. Is that all the survey you made at that time of the lines you run ?

A. Yes, sir; excepting to locate these three corners; there are three corners set for the corner of 8, 9, 16, and 17. I measured between the corners.

Q. You measured between these corners?

Q. Then you didn’t at that time run from the quarter corner between 8 and 9 to this corner in dispute?

A. No.

Q,. What part of section 8 were you surveying at that time?

A. I set the corner for the center of 8. The southeast corner was what was required.

Q,. Did you attempt to found any corners there at the corner of 16, 17, 8, and 9?

A. No, sir; I found three marks and I thought I hadn’t better locate any more.
Q. Which one did you recognize?
A. The south one.
Q. You didn’t attempt to locate a corner there, did you ?

Q,. Did you run south at that time from the corner in dispute a mile?

[405]*405A. I did not.

Q,. Were you ever at or did you ever attempt to find the corner of sections 17, 16, 20, and 21?

A. No, sir.

Mr. Worthington testifies as follows:

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

Related

Woods v. West
58 N.W. 938 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 N.W. 30, 37 Neb. 400, 1893 Neb. LEXIS 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woods-v-west-neb-1893.