Ashby v. Hall

Decision Date13 December 1886
Citation119 U.S. 526,7 S.Ct. 308,30 L.Ed. 469
PartiesASHBY v. HALL and another. 1
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Eppa Hunton and Jeff. Chandler, for appellant, Ashby.

No appearance for appellees.

FIELD, J.

This case comes from the supreme court of Montana. It was a suit to abate an obstruction in an alley in the city of Helena, in that territory. The plaintiffs are the owners of certain lots in a block bordering on the alley over which they claim a right of way, an easement which they or their predecessors used and enjoyed from 1866 to 1871, when the defendant caused the obstruction complained of. In the pleadings and in the findings several facts are assumed to be well known, upon which no information is given; as that the lands within the city of Helena were, in 1869, entered in the local land-office, by the probate judge of the county, under the town-site act; and that there was an addition to the original limits of Helena, known as 'Scott's Addition,' within which are the lots owned by the plaintiffs. It would have facilitated the examination of the case if these facts had been stated with some particularity, rather than assumed to be within the knowledge of the court.

The case was brought in one of the district courts of the territory, and was, by stipulation of the parties, tried without a jury. The facts, as found, so far as they are material, are substantially as follows: In 1866, Scott's addition to Helena was laid out, surveyed, and platted into streets, blocks, lots, and alleys. The alleys ran through the center of the blocks, and were 16 feet in width. The lots of the plaintiffs adjoined one of these alleys, the passage in which was obstructed by a fence placed across it by the defendant. The title to the ground occupied by the town, including the streets and alleys, was in the United States until the entry of the town-site in 1869. The original occupants of the lots recognized the existence of the alley, as did their grantees and successors in interest, until such entry, and received their deeds bounded thereon. The principal use of the alley was to take in wood and hay for the adjoining occupants, and for the ingress and egress of their cows. The plaintiffs and their predecessors in interest had made valuable improvements upon the lots, to which they held a possessory right at the time of the entry of the town-site. Some time afterwards a new survey and a map of the town were made, by direction of the probate judge, as trustee, and were approved by the county commissioners. The survey and map did not show the alley in question, and no proceedings were taken to correct them in that particular; and they were filed with the clerk and recorder of the county. In 1871 the defendant entered upon and occupied the land embracing the alley in question, and in 1872 he received a deed of the same from the probate judge; no adverse claim having been presented.

From the facts, of which the above is a brief statement, the district court found, as a conclusion of law, that, at the time of the entry of the town-site by the probate judge, the plaintiffs and others, as adjacent lot-owners, had a subsisting and valid right in the alley, and to the use thereof; that the probate judge entered the same in connection with the town-site in trust, with the usual rights and interest therein; that his subsequent conveyance thereof to defendant was void and inoperative; and therefore the non-presentation of an adverse claim to defendant's application for the ground was immaterial.

The court accordingly adjudged that the plaintiffs were entitled to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 cases
  • Boise City v. Wilkinson
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • 27 March 1909
    ...... v. Rucker, 10 Colo. 184, 15 P. 791; Newhouse v. Simino, 3 Wash. 648, 29 P. 263; Clark v. Titus, . 2 Ariz. 147, 11 P. 312; Ashby v. Hall, 119 U.S. 526,. 7 S.Ct. 308, 30 L.Ed. 469; Story v. New York Elevated R. R. Co., 90 N.Y. 122, 43 Am. Rep. 146; People v. Kerr, 27. N.Y. ......
  • Scully v. Squier
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • 18 May 1907
    ...... their extent and the space occupied by them, and such law is. valid, and there is also vested private rights in the. streets. ( Ashby v. Hall, 119 U.S. 526, 30 L.Ed. 469,. 7 S.Ct. 308; Thompson v. Holbrook, 1 Idaho 609;. Territory v. Nowland, 3 Dak. 349, 20 N.W. 430; 26. Am. ......
  • Amy v. Amy
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Utah
    • 21 December 1895
    ...... purpose of overcoming the presumption of regularity. Harvey v. Tyler, 2 Wall, 344; Hall v. Law, . 102 U.S. 463; Applegate v. Lexington Mining Co., 117. U.S. 269; Galpin v. Page, 1 Saw. 321; In re. Newman, 75 Cal. 220. Also the ... courts since that act, that citation is hardly necessary. Hussey v. Smith, 99 U.S. 20-25; Ashby v. Hall, 119 U.S. 526; Lamb v. Davenport, 18 Wall. 307; Stark v. Starr, 94 U.S. 477; Grover v. Hawley, 5 Cal. 486; U.S. v. Tithing Yard, 9 ......
  • Young v. Tiner
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • 17 December 1894
    ...... 444; Winfield Town Co. v. Maris, 11 Kan. 121;. Cerf v. Pfleging, 94 Cal. 131, 29 P. 417;. Stringfellow v. Cain, 99 U.S. 617; Ashby v. Hall, 119 U.S. 526, 7 S.Ct. 308; Bingham v. Walla. Walla, 3 Wash. Ter. 68, 13 P. 411; Pueblo v. Budd, 19 Colo. 579, 36 P. 599; Brooke v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT