Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

JAMES H. WALDEN et al., complainants-respondents, v. PINES LAKE LANDCOMPANY et al., defendants-appellants.

1. Title to the waters of the lake in question is exclusively in the owners of the soil beneath the waters. Complainant can have no right to the use of any portion of the lake above defendants' soil, unless he can show a grant, easement or license from defendants. His right to the use of the main road constructed on defendants' land must similarly be based on a grant, easement or license from defendants.

2. It was the intention of the parties, as evidenced by the nature of the land development venture in which they were about to engage and as appears from their written agreement, that each should have an easement or license to use the waters of the lake above the soil owned by the other, which privilege should attach to their respective lands. Complainant having been led into giving the use of a portion of his land for the purpose of making the lake in question possible, and into contributing part of the cost of its creation, defendants are estopped from denying his right to use the entire lake. The intent and spirit of the agreement between the parties that complainant was to have the right to use the entire lake, is also to be gathered from a subsequent agreement which shows the desire of the parties to develop and market their lands for dwelling purposes, and the reference therein to boathouses on complainant's lands is a recognition on the part of the defendants of his right to the use of the entire lake.

3. The question of damages claimed to have been sustained by the complainants as a result of defendants' interference with their rights was not thoroughly presented or contested. On this question defendants, if they desire, are entitled to a trial by jury; complainants' prayer for relief under this head will be denied without prejudice to their right to bring an action at law for such damages.

PER CURIAM.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion delivered by Vice-Chancellor Fielder in the court of chancery.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, PARKER, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, PERSKIE, PORTER, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, HAGUE, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WALDEN v. PINES LAKE LAND CO
(Sep 22, 1939)