State v. 6.0 Acres of Land
| Decision Date | 19 February 1958 |
| Citation | 139 A.2d 75,101 N.H. 228 |
| Parties | The STATE of New Hampshire v. 6.0 ACRES OF LAND. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Louis C. Wyman, Atty. Gen., and Warren E. Waters, Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State.
George R. Scammon, Exeter, for claimants Marcus and Marie A. J. Marty.
The issue before the court is simply that of whether any errors of law are apparent upon the face of the record. Racine v. Armstrong, 100 N.H. 96, 120 A.2d 137. The rule for apportionment of accretion between adjoining riparian owners which was employed by the master in reaching his conclusions is one which has long been established both in this jurisdiction and elsewhere. Batchelder v. Keniston, 51 N.H. 496; Watson v. Horne, 64 N.H. 416, 13 A. 789. See State v. George C. Stafford Company, 99 N.H. 92, 100, 105 A.2d 569; III American Law of Property, § 15.31, p. 867; 5A Thompson on Real Property (1957 Replacement) § 2560, p. 610. As briefly stated in Batchelder v. Keniston, supra, 51 N.H. 498, the rule is applied as follows: 'Give to each owner a share of the new shore line in proportion to what he held in the old shore line * * * and then the division of the land would be completed by running a line from the bound between the parties on the old river bank to the point thus determined on the newly formed shore * * *.'
As was pointed out in Watson v. Horne, supra, 64 N.H. 418, 13 A. at page 790, 'When the general course of the shore approximates a straight line, the division is made among the proprietors by lines perpendicular to the general course of the original bank, or of the original mark of the shore.' But when 'it curves or bends, the general rule is to * * * divide * * * the newly formed water line' according to the rule described in Batchelder v. Keniston, supra. See State v. George C. Stafford Co., 99 N.H. 92, 100, 105 A.2d 569. 'The dividing lines across the aluvion are commonly laid down by connecting the extremities of the upland sides at the old shore with the point of division on the new shore as fixed by proportion.' Shelton, Boundaries and Adjacent Properties (1930) 338-339. See note, 6 Ark.L.Rev. 68. Since in this case the general course of the shore surrounding the accretion is not straight but predominantly convex, the rule of Batchelder v. Keniston, supra, was properly employed to make the division. Watson v. Horne, supra.
The fact that the accretion which formed along the claimants' property resulted in whole or in part from the artificial obstruction erected by the State does not operate to prevent acquisition of rights in the accretion by the claimants. See Annotation 134 A.L.R. 467, 468-472; Solomon v. Sioux City, 243 Iowa 634, 639-640, 51 N.W.2d 472.
It is urged on behalf of the claimants however that erection of the jetty southerly from the original high water mark toward the low water mark constituted a trespass by the State to rights of the claimants; and that the new high water mark which resulted upon completion of the jetty should be ignored in favor of the high water mark which existed prior thereto, in determining the division of the accretion between the parties. Upon this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Michaelson v. Silver Beach Imp. Ass'n, Inc.
...accretions.' Burke v. Commonwealth, 283 Mass. 63, 68, 186 N.E. 277, 279. See Adams v. Frothingham, 3 Mass. 352; State v. 6.0 Acres of Land, 101 N.H. 228, 231, 139 A.2d 75. Here, however, the beach was created solely by the Commonwealth in a relatively short time by its direct The question, ......
-
State By and Through McKay v. Sause
...v. Jones, 1957, 233 La. 915, 98 So.2d 236, (new channel dredged which resulted in gradual drying up of old bed); State v. 6.0 Acres of Land, 1958, 101 N.H. 228, 139 A.2d 75, (artificial accretions from bridge structure); Littlefield v. Nelson, 10 Cir., 1957, 246 F.2d 956, (allowing title to......
-
Horry County v. Tilghman
...1002 (1894); Adams v. Roberson, 97 Kan. 198, 155 P. 22 (1916); Frank v. Smith 138 Neb. 382, 293 N.W. 329 (1940); State v. 6.0 Acres of Land, 101 N.H. 228, 139 A.2d 75 (1958); City of Missoula v. Bakke, 121 Mont. 534, 198 P.2d 769 The Tilghmans concede that they are not trying to contest the......
-
Borough of Wildwood Crest v. Masciarella
...97 Kan. 198, 155 P. 22 (Sup.Ct.1916); Frank v. Smith, 138 Neb. 382, 293 N.W. 329, 134 A.L.R. 458 (Sup.Ct.1940); State v. 60 Acres of Land, 101 N.H. 228, 139 A.2d 75 (Sup.Ct.1958); City of Missoula v. Bakke, 121 Mont. 534, 198 P.2d 769 (Sup.Ct.1948), and Tiffany, op. cit., § 1223, p. 626. Th......