Summary

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Stevens v. Arnold — Opinion of the Court

The statute allows a person in peaceable possession of lands, claiming to own the same, whose title is disputed, to bring a suit in chancery against any person claiming an interest, calling upon him to set forth his title. After the issues are tried the decree is to settle the rights of all parties and to be conclusive. The complainants in the chancery suit alleged possession and claimed ownership, at first by accretion but by amendment by virtue of two deeds only. The defendant, as here, set up his riparian grant and a claim by accretion.
Source: Wikisource

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Stevens v. Arnold — Opinion of the Court

In some countries that inherit the Roman law the rule may be different. Ker v. Couden, 223 U.S. 268, 32 Sup. Ct. 284, 56 L. Ed. 432. We conclude that the conveyance by the State did not give the defendant a title to land added by accretion to the complainants' premises, and that it does not matter that this conveyance was by metes and bounds. The boundaries however indicated were good until changed by the gradual work of the ocean and then were modified in accordance with what we believe to be the common law.
Source: Wikisource

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Stevens v. Arnold — Opinion of the Court

This is a bill to quiet title to land in Atlantic City, New Jersey, brought primarily at lease under a statute of that state. 4 Compiled Stat. p. 5399 (P. L. 1870, p. 20) . The suit was begun by Samuel F. Nirdlinger and now is maintained by his executors and trustees (the respondents) . He owned a parcel lying to the east of New Hampshire Ave ue, which runs north and south, and to the north of Oriental Avenue which crosses the other avenue at right angles.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature