Upham
Upham v. Hosking
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Plaintiff brought an action of ejectment to recover certain lands described in his complaint.
Upon the land sued for there was a wharf, built under a franchise granted by the state to one Collins, under whom defendant derived title. Judgment passed for plaintiff; there was a motion for a.new trial, which was denied, and this appeal is from the judgment as well as from the order denying a new trial.
Plaintiff introduced in evidence a patent from the state, bearing date May 18, 1872, and also a deed from one Brown to him, dated February 29, 1872.
The evidence and admissions of the parties clearly show that all of the lands in controversy are within the boundaries of the description contained in the patent, except a strip seventeen by one hundred and thirty feet; as to that strip, it was admitted that the title was in Brown, who conveyed the same to plaintiff, unless the strip was excluded by an exception contained in the deed of conveyance. The finding of the court is “that the plaintiff is, and was at the commencement of this suit, and at all the times alleged in his complaint, the owner in fee simple and entitled to the possession of all and singular the premises described in…