Pingree v. Mcduffie
Decision Date | 20 March 1876 |
Citation | 56 N.H. 306 |
Parties | Pingree v. Mcduffie. |
Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Way of necessity.
A party having conveyed a portion of his land over which was the only means of access to the remaining land---Held, that a right of way by necessity to the remaining land was reserved
TRESPASS qu. cl. fr., for breaking and entering the plaintiff's close, situate in Auburn,---marked B on the plan hereto annexed,---between July 1, 1873, and August 14 1873, and depasturing his grass, and damaging his crops by his cattle and teams. Plea, the general issue, with a brief statement claiming a right of way by prescription and of necessity. The action was referred to a referee, who reported as follows:
wet, and drawn the hay out over lot B, on the Anderson path, without objection, till 1873. In 1872 the meadow was wet, and was not cut, nor in 1874. In 1873 the plaintiff ploughed up a portion of his lot, including the Anderson path. The defendant asked permission of him to cross his land to get off his hay, which the plaintiff refused, and forbade his crossing. The Anderson path never was ploughed up before 1873. The defendant drew out his hay in 1873 over the plaintiff's land, keeping as near the margin of the ploughed land as the low wet land would allow; and, in so doing, his team passed over the outer row of potatoes there growing. The defendant had no way of getting off his land, except over the land of an adjoining owner: he could not pass out over the Anderson path towards Hook's without first coming on to the plaintiff's lot. [See original for image]
Lot C is meadow, and impassable for teams. The distance out by way of Hook's to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Whitehouse v. Cummings
...v. Porter, 8 Allen, 1; Schmidt v. Quinn,136 Mass. 575; Oliver v. Hook, 47 Md. 301; Dunklee v. Railroad Co., 24 N. H. 489, 505; Pingree v. McDuffie, 56 N. H. 306; Cooper v. Maupin, 6 Mo. 624; Mead v. Anderson, 40 Kan. 203.1 When, therefore, property in land has been severed by voluntary or s......
-
Bradley v. Patterson, 80-432
...land primarily upon the fact that the claimed easement crosses onto the land of Nina Switzer. The plaintiff relies upon Pingree v. McDuffie, 56 N.H. 306 (1876), for the proposition that the trial court has authority to grant an easement by necessity over the defendants' land notwithstanding......
-
Fritz v. Tompkins
...of way by appropriate provision in the latter conveyance. Buckby v. Coles, 5 Taunt. 311; Simmons v. Sines, 4 Abb. Dec. 246; Pingree v. McDuffie, 56 N. H. 306;Brigham v. Smith, 4 Gray, 297, 64 Am. Dec. 76;Seymour v. Lewis, 13 N. J. Eq. 439, 443, 444,78 Am. Dec. 108, and cases cited. In Lampm......
-
Hoffman v. Shoemaker
...way and other privileges claimed by defendant were not annexed to the sugar house estate by any natural or legal necessity." In Pingree v. McDuffie, 56 N.H. 306, the court held follows: "A party having conveyed a portion of his land over which was the only means of access to the remaining l......