|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STEWART v. CHEW. 441
waste by cutting down timber trees and doing acts injurious to the
land. Whereupon he prayed for an injunction to stay waste, for
relief, &c. An injunction was granted as prayed.
The defendant in his answer admitted, that the plaintiff had
made the purchase as stated; but specially denied, that he had or
was then committing any waste as charged; and averred, that he,
the defendant, had purchased another part of the same tract of land
called Elkton Head Manor, adjoining to that purchased by the
plaintiff, on which he had cut a large quantity of wood ready for
market; and that by a survey which had been made, laying down
the boundaries, as admitted, between the lands of this defendant
and the plaintiff, it clearly appeared, that the defendant had com-
mitted no manner of waste or trespass whatever on the lands of
the plaintiff. Upon this answer, the defendant gave notice of a
motion to dissolve the injunction.
3d October, 1831.—BLAND, Chancellor.—The motion to dis-
solve the injunction standing ready for hearing, and having been
submitted on notes by the solicitors of the parties, the proceedings
were read and considered.
It is not intimated in this bill, that the plaintiff had instituted a
suit of any kind which was then depending, to establish his right
to the lands upon which the alleged wrong had been committed.
It is therefore quite clear, that this cannot be considered as one of
those cases in which an injunction is granted to stay waste and
preserve the property pending a suit to try the title, or to ascertain
the true location of the land to which the alleged injury has been
done. And as it is not stated, that there is any privity of title or
estate between these parties, this can only be regarded as a mere
injunction to stay trespass alleged to have been committed by a
stranger; and hence, according to the well settled course of this
court, in relation to cases of this kind, where the defendant, as in
this instance, positively denies all the facts of the imputed wrong
and injury as charged in the bill, the injunction must be dissolved, (a)
Whereupon it is Ordered, that the injunction heretofore granted
in this case, be and the same is hereby annulled and dissolved.
(a ) Duval v. Waters, 1 Bland, 569.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56 v.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
