Skip to main content
· 3/3/1911

Beecher v. Newcomer

Citations

  • 46 Pa. Super. 44
  • 1911 Pa. Super. LEXIS 226

Syllabus

<p>Land law — Boundaries—Surveys—Monuments—Calls—Courses and distances.</p> <p>1. The most persuasive evidence of the original location of a survey are the monuments made upon the ground by the surveyor for that survey, such as the marking of trees for corners and lines, or the adoption of natural monuments, such as streams crossing the lines of a survey. These monuments prevail, where satisfactorily shown to exist, against calls for older surveys, which rank next in value. Calls for comers, such as posts, stones, etc., are of little value, particularly as the survey becomes old, for the reason that there is no way of complete identification or of the determination as to their age or the time at which they were made. Calls for older and well-marked surveys rank next in value. Courses and distances are of still less value, and are to be resorted to only when monuments and calls fail, and are to be disregarded, when they contradict the monuments and calls.</p> <p>2. A judgment on a verdict for plaintiff in a case involving the location of a survey will not be reversed because the trial judge somewhat magnifies the difficulties under which the jury will labor in determining the location of the land, if it appears that the question was left finally, entirely and fairly to the jury.</p> <p>3. Where there is a conflict of testimony as to the location of a survey, the question of its location is for the jury.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Trial—{Verdict—Jury—Reformation of verdict.</p> <p>4. Where a jury practically find a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, although not stated in the proper form, seal their verdict and separate, and after an interval of four days by reason of intervening holidays, meet again, and upon the opening of the verdict the court instructs them either to find for the plaintiff for a sum stated, or if they find for the defendant, so to state it, and the jury return with a verdict for defendant, it is the duty of the court to refuse such verdict. If it fa

Judges: Beaver, Head, Henderson, Morrison, Orlady, Porter, Rice

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.