Bigley
Bigley v. Nunan
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Crockett, J.
— This appeal is by the defendants from a judgment of the county court in an action for nuisance caused by the obstruction of a public street in front of the plaintiffs premises.
The point that the action involved the title to real estate, and that for that reason the county court had no jurisdiction, is not well taken. The questions before the court were: 1. Whether the locus in quo was a public street; that is to say, *853 whether the public had an easement which entitled it to the free use of the land as a highway. If the easement existed, it is immaterial in whom the fee was. 2. If the easement was established, did the defendants obstruct the free enjoyment of it, as alleged? 3. Had the plaintiff suffered such damages as entitled him to maintain the action?
The first proposition is the only one which presents any real difficulty. The plaintiff claims to have established that on the 31st of January, 1861, the northerly half of the block, through the center of which the street runs, was the property of J. C. Beideman, and on that day he filed in the recorder’s office a map of this and other adjoining blocks, on which the street in controversy was laid down and was denominated…