Ruffin v. Seabd. Air Line Ry
Decision Date | 24 November 1909 |
Citation | 66 S.E. 317,151 N.C. 330 |
Parties | RUFFIN. v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RY. et al. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
1. Licenses (§ 46*) — Real Property — Nature op License—How Created.
A license in real estate arises from a grant by the owner thereof, and is as a rule voidable at his will, and hence a reservation or exception in a deed is not a license in favor of the grantor.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Licenses, Cent. Dig. § 100; Dec. Dig. § 46.*]
2. Easements (§ 25*)—Duration—Exception in Conveyance—Words of Inheritance.
Where an easement is created by way of an exception in a deed, words of inheritance are not necessary to create a perpetual easement in fee.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Easements, Cent. Dig. § 71; Dec. Dig. § 25.*]
3. Easements (§ 25*)—Duration — Reservation in Deed—Words of Inheritance.
A reservation of an easement intended to be appurtenant to the land retained by the grantor *s not within the rule that the word "heirs" must bo used to create an estate which will extend beyond the grantor making the reservation.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Easements, Cent. Dig. § 71; Dec. Dig. § 25.*]
4. Easements (§ 25*)—Reservation in Deed —Words of Inheritance.
A grantor in a deed of land for a depot site, stipulating that the grantor shall have the right to erect a warehouse on the land, provided he does not encroach on any portion of the depot ground of the width of 115 feet on the grade, retains for warehouse purposes a determinable fee in the land conveyed outside of the 115 feet for the erection of a warehouse, and this right is an easement appurtenant to the ownership of the adjacent land of the grantor, not terminating at his death, whether the right is created by way of exception, in which case words of inheritance are not necessary to create the right in fee, or whether the right is a reservation, which, under Code 1883, § 1280, in force at the time of the execution of the deed, must be construed to be in fee, unless a contrary intent appears, as the intention shows a perpetual right.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Easements, Cent. Dig. § 71; Dec. Dig. § 25.*]
Appeal from Superior Court, Franklin County; Cooke, Judge.
Action by William H. Ruffin, administrator of J. F. Jones, deceased, against the Seaboard Air Line Railway and another. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant Seaboard Air Line Railway appeals. Affirmed.
On July 17, 1885, J. F. Jones executed to the Louisburg Railroad Company a deed conveying a depot site at Louisburg, N. C, the metes and bounds of which are set forth in said deed. This deed contained the following stipulation: "It is further stipulated that the said parties of the first part shall have the right to erect a warehouse along the southwest side of said lands, and upon the southwest margin of said road, provided, they do not encroach upon any portion of the depot ground of the width of 115 feet on the grade, so that the railroad company shall have a width of depot grounds of at least 115 feet on the grade." In 1885 or 1886, J. F. Jones erected upon the margin of said land a warehouse extending a distance of about 23 feet over upon the land of the said railroad, but leaving an unobstructed width of 115 feet of depot ground. This warehouse has been used and occupied by J. F. Jones and his heirs and assigns continuously since its erection, and is now so used as a warehouse. J. F. Jones is dead, and William H. Ruffin has qualified as his administrator. In the course of the administration of the estate, it became necessary for the administrator to file a petition to sell the land upon which the warehouse was erected to make assets, and under said petition an order of sale was made, and William H. Ruffin appointed commissioner. The lot was sold to J. M. Allen for the sum of $2,205; but upon investigation it developed that the warehouse situated on the said lot extended 23 feet beyond the boundary of the land conveyed to the Louisburg Railroad Company, which lot now belongs to the Seaboard Railroad Company. J. M. Allen thereupon refused to complete the purchase unless someconcession in price was made by the commissioner. The commissioner refused to make any concession, and brought this action to force the said J. M. Allen to take the property and pay the price agreed upon. The Seaboard Air Line was made a party defendant in this action, and filed answer therein setting up its right to the entire tract conveyed to the Louisburg Railroad Company by J. F. Jones free from any right of the heirs or assigns of said J. F. Jones to occupy any part thereof for any purpose whatever.
The facts were agreed upon, and the matter submitted to Cooke, J., at January term, 1909, of Franklin. Upon the facts found, in accordance with the facts agreed, Judge Cooke rendered the following decree: The defendant Seaboard Air Line Railway excepted to the foregoing decree and appealed.
The following is a plat of the property in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Reed v. Elmore
...Ill. 336, 34 N.E. 556, 21 L.R.A. 391. The easements imposed are coterminous with the estate granted and retained. Ruffin v. Seaboard Air Line Ry., 151 N.C. 330, 66 S.E. 317. Lots 3 and 4 comprised 102 acres of Mrs. Shannon's 150-acre tract. The deed from Mrs. Shannon to plaintiff provided a......
-
Bubser v. Ranguette
...2, § 360, citing Ensign v. Colt, 75 Conn. 111, 52 A. 829, 946;Smith v. Lockwood, 100 Minn. 221, 110 N. W. 980; and Ruffin v. Seaboard Air Line Ry., 151 N. C. 330, 66 S. E. 317. The right to encroach may be an easement, though not necessarily so. In our case, the right, having been created a......
-
Chemical Foundation v. EI Du Pont De Nemours & Co.
...A true license can be granted only by one who owns or has an interest in the property affected by the license. Ruffin v. Seaboard Air Line R. Co., 151 N. C. 330, 66 S. E. 317; Williams v. Concord Cong. Church, 193 Pa. 120, 44 A. 272; Bohn v. Hatch, 133 N. Y. 64, 30 N. E. 659. That which in ......
-
Farbwerke, Meister Lucius & Bruning v. Chemical Foundation
...that it was not a true license, for a license in the legal sense can be granted only by the owner of a patent, Ruffin v. Seaboard Air Line R. Co., 151 N. C. 330, 66 S. E. 317; Williams v. Concord Cong. Church, 193 Pa. 120, 44 A. 272, and, in consequence, the royalties were not true royaltie......