Jangraw v. Mee

• Decision Date: 25 February 1903
• Citation: 75 Vt. 211,54 A. 189
• Court: Vermont Supreme Court
• Parties: JANGRAW v. MEE.

54 A. 189

75 Vt. 211

JANGRAW

v. MEE.

Supreme Court of Vermont. Washington.

Feb. 25, 1903.

Exceptions from Washington county court; Start, Judge.

Ejectment by Oughtney Jangraw against Mary Mee. Plaintiff's motion to set aside a verdict for defendant was overruled, and plaintiff brings exceptions. Affirmed.

Argued before TYLER, MUNSON, WATSON, STAFFORD, and HASELTON, JJ.

George W. Wing and John G. Wing, for plaintiff.

T. R. Gordon and F. L. Laird, for defendant.

WATSON, J. This action was tried by jury, resulting in a verdict for the defendant. Before judgment on verdict, the plaintiff moved to set aside the verdict on the grounds: (1) That it was against the weight of evidence, contrary thereto, and not in accordance therewith; (2) that the northeasterly line of the plaintiff—being the line in dispute—was conceded to start from a certain cedar post marking the westerly corner of the defendant's land; and (3) that the evidence in the case had a tendency to show that the disputed premises had been used in common by the parties, and that the defendant's occupation had been by the plaintiff's permission, and not openly, notoriously, and exclusively adverse to him under a claim of right. The only question before us is on exception to the overruling of this motion. The defense was placed upon the ground of title in the defendant, both by record and by prescription. The plaintiff claimed, and the defendant conceded, that the northeasterly line of the plaintiff's lot—the line in dispute—started from a certain cedar post marking the westerly corner of the defendant's land. The defendant's evidence tended to show that from the year 1875 she and her husband owned and occupied the premises now owned by her adjoining the plaintiff's land until the husband's death, about 10 years ago, and that since then she has been the owner thereof, and has occupied them in person or by her tenants; that when the defendant and her husband bought the place in 1875 the line between their land and the land now owned by the plaintiff was indicated on Loomis street by the cedar post, and that there was also a "line board" on the barn; and that in 1879, and as late as 1887 and 1888. a common board fence was there on this line, or portions of it. It is to this line thus indicated that the defendant claims to own. Her evidence tended to show occupancy of the disputed premises and to this line by herself and husband until his death, and by herself or her tenants since; also...