Arthurs v. Wilson

Citations

• 242 Pa. 429
• 89 A. 464

Syllabus

<p>Beal estate — Trespass to land — Cutting timber — Estrepement— Dissolution of writ- — Practise, C. P.</p> <p>On a hearing of a motion to dissolve a writ of estrepement to restrain the cutting of timber on certain land, it appeared that in 1904 the plaintiff brought an action of trespass to recover damages for the removal of limestone from the land, that in that action the title to the land was made the principal issue and a verdict was recovered in favor of the defendant. The judgment was reversed by the Superior Court for misdirection in the charge, but without any decision on the merits of the controversy. The defendant was in possession during this time, and the plaintiff took no further action for about four years, until defendant began cutting timber, when the estrepement was brought. It appeared that the timber which defendant proposed to cut had only a commercial value, which would not increase or decrease within the following year or two, that it could be cut and manufactured into lumber at less expense then than at a later date because of the proximity of a mill about to be removed from the neighborhood, and that the interests of both the plaintiff and defendant would be better subserved by permitting the defendant to cut the timber, except line trees. The court dissolved the writ except as to line trees, upon the defendant’s giving bond to indemnify the plaintiff against damages which he might sustain, in case title should be determined in plaintiff’s favor. Held, no error.</p>