clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings of the Maryland Court of Appeals, 1695-1729
Volume 77, Preface 50   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

1 INTRODUCTION

Notley Rozier v. Philip Lynes. Contest of title to tract without dispute of
boundary lines.

William Coursey v. Richard Bishop. Contest of title to tract without dispute
of boundary lines.

Edward Hammond v. John Watts and Wife's Lessee (Stephens White).
Contest of title to tract without dispute of boundary lines.

Charles Carroll's Lessee (William Fitzredmond) v. George Eskridge. Con-
test of title to tract without dispute of boundary lines.

Oswel Hoskins v. John Causeen's Lessee (Upgate Reeves). Contest of title
to tract without dispute of boundary lines. The transcript not copied into this
record. Case agreed before hearing.

Henry Sewell's Lessee (Edmund Benson) v. Samuel Howard. Contest of
title to tract without dispute of boundary lines.

John Bush v. Thomas Robins' Lessee (Daniel Walker) -1 Contest of title
of tract without dispute of boundary lines. Appeal to King in Council apparently
not pressed.

Charles Carroll v. Robert Tyler's Lessee (William Jones) .2 Contest of
title to tract without dispute of boundary lines.

John Digges' Lessee (Thomas Nelson) v. John Beale.3 Contest of title to
tract without dispute of boundary lines. Appealed to the King in Council.

Ann Lloyd v. David Robinson and Wife's Lessees (Daniel Walker and
others) .* Contest of title to tract without dispute of boundary lines. Record
concluded before transcribing this case completely.

e) Trespass Quare Clausum Fregit

Richard Cooper v. Henry Bayley. Contest over boundary lines.

The forms followed in both ejectment and trespass quare clausum fregit still
acknowledged their common origin in the writ of trespass. " Trespass and eject-
ment " was the title given the action of ejectment, and in it the plaintiff declared
upon a trespass. The fictitious lease, entry, and ouster are here exhibited early
in their career, and the English procedure in contests of title appears adhered to
without substantial variation. In contests over boundary lines, on the other
hand, there was the preliminary proceeding peculiar to the province, already
mentioned, to define the ground of controversy for the trial court and jury.
About the middle of the seventeenth century there grew up in Maryland, in
place of the view resorted to in England, a practice of making a preliminary sur-
vey and preparing plats of the lines contended for by the opposing parties.5
Before a case came to trial one or both of the parties would move the court that
a warrant be issued for a resurvey, as it was called, and an order for it would
be passed as a matter of course. Until about 1695 the warrant, directed to the
sheriff of the proper county, usually required that the survey be made under the
direction of a jury of twelve men of the neighborhood, the inquest, upon the evi-
dence of witnesses if necessary, and that, when made, it should be returned

1 Reported i Harris & McHenry, 50.

2 Ibid., 78.

s Ibid., 26 and 67.

* Ibid., 78.

6 Kilty, The Landholder's Assistant, pp. 133 et seq.


 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings of the Maryland Court of Appeals, 1695-1729
Volume 77, Preface 50   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives