Simmons v. Addis

Decision Date21 December 1954
Citation141 Conn. 738,110 A.2d 457
CourtConnecticut Supreme Court
PartiesJoseph SIMMONS v. Beulah M. ADDIS. Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut

Harry H. Lugg, Rockville, for appellant (plaintiff).

Valentino D. Clementino, Hartford, for appellee (defendant).

Before INGLIS, C. J., and BALDWIN, O'SULLIVAN, WYNNE, and DALY, JJ.

WYNNE, Associate Justice.

This is an action to quiet title to, and to recover possession of, a strip of land lying along the boundary between the properties of the parties in the town of Manchester. The action really concerns a boundary line dispute. In a subordinate aspect, it has to do with whether or not the parties had composed their dispute by entering into a binding accord in final settlement of their controversy. The plaintiff in his brief reduces the issues to such a compass. The trial court rendered judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff has appealed.

The facts are as follows: Louise C. England, the predecessor in title of both parties, purchased a tract of land with 400 feet frontage, more or less, on the east side of Vernon Street, in Manchester, from Addie L. Geiser on May 9, 1938. Mrs. Geiser had acquired it on May 14, 1881, as her distributive share of the estate of her father, Salmon Millard. On May 27, 1938, Mrs. England conveyed a portion of it to the plaintiff. The deed described it as being bounded on the north by land of the grantor, east and south by land of Primo Ansaldi, and west by Vernon Street. The deed also stated that it was the southerly half of the parcel conveyed by Mrs. Geiser to Mrs. England. On the day of the purchase, Ansaldi pointed out to the plaintiff the northerly boundary of his, Ansaldi's, property, which was also the plaintiff's southerly boundary. The plaintiff, to mark his southwest corner, drove an iron pipe on the line indicated. He then employed a surveyor and with his aid marked the northwest corner. The plaintiff went into possession of this land and claimed only the land between the two marked corners. On October 20, 1943, Mrs. England conveyed a portion of the northerly half of the land which she had acquired from Mrs. Geiser to James V. and Margaret Anderson. The deed to the Andersons indicated that the southwesterly corner of the parcel conveyed was located at the northwesterly corner of the plaintiff's land. It described the property conveyed as having a frontage of 100 feet on Vernon Street and as being bounded on the north by the remaining land of the grantor, on the east by Ansaldi and on the south by the plaintiff's land. The Anderson parcel, through several conveyances, came to the defendant, who built a house upon it. An iron pipe, marking the northwest corner of the plaintiff's lot and the southwest corner of the Anderson lot, stood at the halfway point of the Vernon Street frontage of the original England parcel. In 1942, the plaintiff erected a fence along his northerly boundary, beginning at the location of the iron pipe. He did not claim any land north of the line running east from the iron pipe until he instituted this action in 1948.

The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Koennicke v. Maiorano
    • United States
    • Appellate Court of Connecticut
    • September 10, 1996
    ...to prove that the boundary is where he claims it to be. Steinman v. Maier, 179 Conn. 574, 575, 427 A.2d 828 (1980); Simmons v. Addis, 141 Conn. 738, 741, 110 A.2d 457 (1954). The plaintiff is required to prevail on the strength of his title and not on the weakness of his adversary's claim. ......
  • Vennard v. Morrison
    • United States
    • Circuit Court of Connecticut. Connecticut Circuit Court, Appellate Division
    • December 14, 1964
    ...and, subordinately, to adjudicate title. The burden was upon the plaintiff to prove the location of the boundary line. Simmons v. Addis, 141 Conn. 738, 741, 110 A.2d 457. In deciding these issues in favor of the plaintiff, the court based its conclusion upon the following facts The Trotter ......
  • Velsmid v. Nelson
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • May 30, 1978
    ...McNamara v. Watertown, 100 Conn. 575, 579, 124 A. 244. The burden is on the plaintiff to locate the boundary line. Simmons v. Addis, 141 Conn. 738, 741, 110 A.2d 457." Barrs v. Zukowski, 148 Conn. 158, 164-65, 169 A.2d 23, 26. A plaintiff's claim may fail simply as a result of his or her in......
  • Barrs v. Zukowski
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • March 8, 1961
    ...v. Town of Watertown, 100 Conn. 575, 579, 124 A. 244. The burden is on the plaintiff to locate the boundary line. Simmons v. Addis, 141 Conn. 738, 741, 110 A.2d 457. In the instant case, the plaintiffs are unable to fix the location of the boundary line with any degree of certainty. Their s......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT