Stone v. Inhabitants of Heath
Charles O. Stone & another v. Inhabitants of Heath
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
C. Allen, J.
1. The application was sufficient in form. In Perry v. Sherborn, 11 Cush. 388 , relied on by the respondent, an application for a jury to determine the damages sustained by reason of the discontinuance of a town way was held insufficient, because it did not show that the applicants’ land abutted on the way. But in the present case it was alleged that the way was laid out across the applicants’ land, and that the land had been entered upon and possession thereof taken for the purpose of constructing the way, the same having been laid out two rods in width. It sufficiently appeared that they were injured in their property, and aggrieved by the assessment of damages.
2. It was not necessary to set forth in detail all the elements . of the damages claimed; and it was proper to admit evidence of the cost of fencing, to aid the jury in determining the damages. Commonwealth v. Norfolk, 5 Mass. 435, 437 .
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.