J.S. Lang Eng'g Co. v. Wilkins Potter Press
| Decision Date | 30 November 1923 |
| Citation | 141 N.E. 501,246 Mass. 529 |
| Parties | J. S. LANG ENGINEERING CO. v. WILKINS POTTER PRESS. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Superior Court, Suffolk County; John D. McLaughlin, Judge.
Bill by the J. S. Lang Engineering Company against the Wilkins Potter Press to restrain the defendant from maintaining a railroad siding within the limits of a certain private way and to have obstructions of a temporary nature removed. Decree for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
F. J. V. Dakin, of Boston, for appellant.
L. R. Chamberlin, of Boston, for appellee.
In 1916, the plaintiff purchased from the heirs of one Roberts land in Waltham, abutting on the south upon the location of the Boston & Maine Railroad, and as appurtenant thereto it acquired, ‘to be used * * * by the grantee [the plaintiff] in common with the owners of the remainder of said Roberts' land, their heirs and assigns,’ a right of way from ‘South street over a strip of land with uniform width of thirty feet (30 feet)’ adjoining said location. The deed creating this easement provided:
‘It is understood and agreed that the construction and use of a side track from said railroad upon said right of way by the said Roberts' heirs or their heirs or assigns shall not be deemed an obstruction of the grantees' right therein provided there is left in said way an unobstructed width of twenty (20) feet.’
The plaintiff is still the owner of the property. In 1922, the land between that of the plaintiff and South street was conveyed to the defendant subject to the plaintiff's right of way. The defendant is now constructing a siding from the tracks of the Boston & Maine Railroad in an easterly direction obliquely across the way to a loading platform adjoining its factory.
‘The distance from the point at which the side track enters the way on its south boundary to the point at which it emerges on the north, is about 160 feet, and for the distance of about 80 feet in the 30-foot strip there is not left an unobstructed width of 20 feet outside of the space included by the siding.’
The defendant proposes and intends to build the way ‘in accordance with proper and modern methods of constructing highways' and with the rails of the siding ‘flush with the top of the surface of the roadway, and * * * protected on both sides by planks or stringers in the usual manner adopted for street crossings.’
The question is whether such construction and use of the siding are an infringement of the plaintiff's rights under its deed.
[1] The long-established rule is that the owner of the servient estate is entiled to make such use of it as is consistent with the easement. Salter v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 239 Mass. 235, 248, 132 N. E. 37, and cases there collected. New York Central Railroad v. Ayer, 242 Mass. 69, 136 N. E. 364. In the case first cited it was decided that the mere construction and use of a railroad track across a private way were not an invasion of the easement provided the track was so laid as not to obstruct the way in an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Western Massachusetts Elec. Co. v. Sambo's of Massachusetts, Inc.
...is that such an owner is entitled to make such use of the estate as is consistent with the easement, J. S. Lang Engr. Co. v. Wilkins Potter Press, 246 Mass. 529, 531, 141 N.E. 501 (1923), and cases cited; Hodgkins v. Bianchini, 323 Mass. 169, 174, 80 N.E.2d 464 (1948), or, as sometimes stat......
-
Carter v. Sullivan
...as matter of interpretation of the grant thereof. Atkins v. Bordman, 2 Metc. 457, 467,37 Am. Dec. 100;J. S. Lang Engineering Co. v. Wilkins Potter Press, 246 Mass. 529, 532, 141 N. E. 501;Barrett v. Duchaine, 254 Mass. 37, 40, 41, 149 N. E. 632. Conceivably a passageway for foot passage and......
-
Sheftel v. Lebel
...used in the written instrument, construed when necessary in the light of the attendant circumstances. J.S. Lang Engr. Co. v. Wilkins Potter Press, 246 Mass. 529, 532, 141 N.E. 501 (1923). Suburban Land Co. v. Billerica, 314 Mass. 184, 189-190, 49 N.E.2d 1012 (1943). Barchenski v. Pion, 9 Ma......
-
Patterson v. Paul
...to all its terms and the then existing conditions so far as they are illuminating.'" Id., quoting J.S. Lang Eng'g Co. v. Wilkins Potter Press, 246 Mass. 529, 532, 141 N.E. 501 (1923). See Hewitt v. Perry, 309 Mass. 100, 105, 34 N.E.2d 489 (1941). See also Restatement of Property § 483 comme......