Boggs v. Eaton
| Decision Date | 09 January 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 51592,51592 |
| Parties | Mary BOGGS v. Janice EATON et al. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Robert O. Homes, Jr., Metairie, for appellant.
Eaton, Cottrell, Galloway & Lang, W. Joel Blass, James B. Galloway, Mize, Thompson & Blass, Gulfport, for appellees.
Before ROBERTSON, P. J., and LEE and BOWLING, JJ.
LEE, Justice, for the Court:
Mary Boggs brought suit in the Chancery Court of Harrison County, Honorable Frank W. Alexander, presiding, against Janice Eaton individually, and as administratrix of the estate of Fred and Charlotte Schustedt, seeking to remove clouds from her easement title, and to enjoin defendants from interference with her rights under the easement, and damages for such interference with her easement rights. The chancellor denied the relief prayed for, dismissed the bill of complaint and entered judgment for the defendants and Mary Boggs appeals.
Did the chancellor err in dismissing the bill of complaint when the proof showed as a matter of law that appellant had valid title to the easement and appellees committed a trespass against her rights under said easement?
In the year 1908 Archibald Boggs and Edwin B. Lang were neighbors and adjacent property owners on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. A water well was drilled on the Lang property and, on March 24, 1908, Lang and Boggs entered into a written agreement whereby Lang, who owned the property on which the well was situated, granted an easement to Boggs and his assigns, which provided for a two-inch water pipe running from the well to the home of Boggs for the purpose of furnishing water to his property. The significant parts of the easement follow:
"That (Lang) for and in consideration of the sum of $100.00 * * * hereby * * * grants and conveys unto (Archibald Boggs), his representatives and assigns, the right to use and consume water from the artesian well * * * in the manner hereinafter described * * * .
The said (Boggs) shall have the right to use water from said well in any quantity he may desire or be able to obtain, so long as said well shall last, by means of the one pipe now connecting said well with premises of said Boggs, as hereinafter described, his said use of said water above granted to be only on the following described property, to-wit: The property owned by the said Boggs and described as being a lot of land facing on the Gulf of Mexico and bounded on the East by the property of ______ Boggs, on the West by the property of the grantor herein, on the South by the Gulf of Mexico and on the north by the L. & N. R.R.
It is further agreed and understood that the rights granted to the said Boggs to use said water shall be confined to his own use and that of his assigns on the property above described, and shall not apply to any party or parties to whom he may hereafter sell lots or to any lots so sold out of the property * * * but it shall only be used by him and his assigns on said plot of ground or premises above described so long as they are kept intact, or such part of said premises as he may retain as curtilage of the house which he now occupies, and for that place only."
Tragedy struck the Boggs and Schustedt families. Archibald Boggs and Bessie Boggs, his wife, died as a result of the 1947 hurricane on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. His devisee, Mary Boggs, appellant herein, acquired the Archibald Boggs property under his last will and testament and she has owned the property since 1947. The Lang property was acquired subsequent to 1948 by a Mr. and Mrs. Fred Schustedt, who lost their lives as a result of Hurricane Camille on or about August 17, 1969.
The house of Archibald Boggs was destroyed by the 1947 hurricane, but the water line from the Lang well was not affected by the hurricane and the water usage was not interrupted. A garage adjacent to the Boggs home was rebuilt as a residence and was occupied by appellant and her brother for approximately one (1) year and then by appellant's tenants. That building, for all practical purposes, was destroyed by Hurricane Camille in 1969.
Subsequent to Hurricane Camille, the Corps of Engineers went upon the Schustedt property with heavy equipment for the purpose of cleaning up the area, and crossed the water line, which resulted in breaking and damaging the pipe. For the first time the water flow from the well was interrupted. Appellant employed a plumbing contractor, Harold Bowser, to replace the old line, or parts of it, with another two-inch pipe, completing the work in February, 1971. The cost of the repair work amounted to eight hundred fifty dollars ($850.00). After installation of the new pipe, appellees removed a section of same which cut off the water flow to the Boggs' property. Prior to Hurricane Camille, the water usage had been continuous and uninterrupted, except that on occasions Mr. Schustedt would lower the pressure in the pipe. At such times, appellant, or her tenant, contacted Mr. Schustedt and persuaded him to resume the water pressure. Appellant resided in a house she had built, in place of the old Boggs home, approximately three hundred (300) feet north of the reconstructed garage but on the same Boggs property. At the time of trial, appellant was receiving water service from the City of Long Beach Water Lines.
Appellees contend that, unless the chancellor is manifestly wrong in his decision, this Court must affirm. The chancellor made no finding of fact, nor did he express his reasons for denying the relief sought. The principle of "manifest error" applies only to a factual situation. If the chancellor is manifestly wrong in basing his decision upon the facts, then this Court will reverse, otherwise, we will affirm. This rule does not apply on questions of law.
There is no dispute in the facts of this case. The parties entered into a lengthy stipulation and, when the appellant rested her case, the appellees also rested without adducing evidence. The question presented here involves the interpretation and construction of the written easement dated March 24, 1908, between the original parties, Archibald Boggs and Edwin Lang. All provisions must be given effect, if such reasonably can be done. In ascertaining the intention of the parties from the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. Dorsey
...Cole v. National Life Ins. Co., 549 So.2d 1301, 1303 (Miss.1989); Busching v. Griffin, 542 So.2d 860, 863 (Miss.1989); Boggs v. Eaton, 379 So.2d 520, 522 (Miss.1980). II. THE LEGALITY OF THE A. THE DISHAROON CONTRACTS The minutes of the Board of Education meeting for September 12, 1985, ref......
-
In re Miss. Rules Evidence
...expert in many fields in addition to science or medicine, such as real estate, cotton brokering, auto mechanics or plumbing. Boggs v. Eaton, 379 So. 2d 520 (1980); Early-Gary, Inc. v. Walters, 294 So. 2d 181 (Miss. 1974); Ludlow Corp. v. Arkwright-Boston Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co., 317 So. 2d 47 (......
-
Harrison County v. City of Gulfport
...National Life Insurance Company, 549 So.2d 1301, 1303 (Miss.1989); Busching v. Griffin, 542 So.2d 860, 863 (Miss.1989); Boggs v. Eaton, 379 So.2d 520, 522 (Miss.1980), or, to be more precise, it is a different kind of question of law than that presented in Part III(A) Both Gulfport and Bilo......
-
Omnibank of Mantee v. United Southern Bank
...Co., 549 So.2d 1301, 1303 (Miss.1989); UHS-Qualicare v. Gulf Coast Community Hospital, 525 So.2d 746, 754 (Miss.1987); Boggs v. Eaton, 379 So.2d 520, 522 (Miss.1980); see also Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 287, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 1789, 72 L.Ed.2d 66, 79 (1982). This as a matter of i......