From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Patten v. Patten

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Sullivan
Jun 1, 1894
44 A. 134 (N.H. 1894)

Opinion

Decided June, 1894.

Hosea W. Parker and Ira Colby, for the plaintiff.

George R. Brown, for the defendants.


ASSUMPSIT, for fees paid to fence-viewers and for services in building a fence. Facts agreed. November 26, 1863, John S. Sanborn conveyed one acre, parcel of his farm, to Thomas Eastman, by a deed containing a clause as follows: "The conditions of this deed are that the said Thomas Eastman, his heirs and assigns, shall build and forever keep in repair the line fence between said Thomas Eastman and the said John S. Sanborn on the land above described." The title to the farm has come to the plaintiff and that of the acre to the defendants, in each case through several mesne conveyances, in none of which is the condition mentioned or referred to. The defendants deny that they are bound by the condition.

Judgment for the plaintiff.

All concurred.


Summaries of

Patten v. Patten

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Sullivan
Jun 1, 1894
44 A. 134 (N.H. 1894)
Case details for

Patten v. Patten

Case Details

Full title:PATTEN v. PATTEN a

Court:Supreme Court of New Hampshire Sullivan

Date published: Jun 1, 1894

Citations

44 A. 134 (N.H. 1894)
68 N.H. 603

Citing Cases

Fowler v. Kent

The titles of the owners are subject to the burden or incumbrance created by the covenant. Burbank v.…