Cummings v. Black

• Decision Date: 01 December 1892
• Citation: 25 A. 906,65 Vt. 76
• Parties: LUCIUS CUMMINGS v. BLACK & COVELL
• Court: Vermont Supreme Court

25 A. 906

65 Vt. 76

LUCIUS CUMMINGS v. BLACK & COVELL

Supreme Court of Vermont

December 1, 1892

GENERAL TERM, 1892

Petition of foreclosure. Heard upon bill, answer and the report of a special master at the March term, 1892 Washington county. THOMPSON, chancellor, decreed for the orator as to the entire premises claimed by him. The defendants appeal. The opinion states the case.

Decree reversed, and cause remanded with a mandate.

T.J Deavitt for the orator.

OPINION

ROSS

The pleadings in this case have not been furnished. We assume they are drawn so as to raise the question discussed.

The contention is in regard to what is conveyed by the mortgage sought to be foreclosed. The description of the premises is in these words: "Being fifty acres of land in the southeasterly corner of lot number six in the tenth range except one acre heretofore conveyed by Silas Black to Samuel Pratt; also a part of the west end of lot number five in said tenth range, lying west of the road; being all and the same farm and premises whereof my father, Silas Black, died seized and possessed, and estimated to contain sixty-five acres. The said farm is bounded westerly and northerly by the Taylor farm, commonly so called, easterly by the road leading from said Taylor farm past my house, and southerly by the Pratt farm, so called. " The father died seized and possessed of a farm made up from three pieces, the two pieces first mentioned in the description of the deed, and a third piece which cornered on the larger of the two pieces on the southwest, containing seven and one-half acres. The first two pieces answer and satisfy the particular description in the deed, in lot, in range, in number of acres, and in lands bounding them on the four sides. In short, they answer and satisfy the description in every particular, except they do not cover all the farm whereof the father died seized and possessed. To answer this general description the third piece must be added. But if the third piece is added, its west end is left unbounded by that part of the description which names the lands bounding the entire premises. It also lies south of the line dividing ranges ten and eleven, and increases the number of acres beyond the number called for by the deed. The intention of the parties, as gathered from the language used when applied to the premises, controls, in giving construction to what is conveyed by a deed. In...