History
  • No items yet
midpage
Blake v. Ham
53 Me. 430
Me.
1866
Check Treatment
Appleton, C. J.

This is a real action. The defendant claims an easement in the demanded premises. But such easement constitutes no bar to the plaintiff’s right to recover.

If disturbed in the enjoyment of his easement, the defendant may enforce his rights by a suit against those by whom the disturbance is caused.

These principles are affirmed by repeated decisions in this State and in Massachusetts. Thompson v. Proprietors of Androscoggin Bridge, 5 Greenl., 6; Blake v. Clark, 6 Greenl., 440; Hancock v. Wentworth, 5 Met., 450; Morgan v. Moore, 3 Gray, 319.

The plaintiff is entitled to costs. — Default to stand.

Cutting, Kent, Dickerson, Barrows and Tapley, JJ., concurred.

Case Details

Case Name: Blake v. Ham
Court Name: Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Date Published: Jul 1, 1866
Citation: 53 Me. 430
Court Abbreviation: Me.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.