Stevens v. Arnold,
262 U.S. 266 (1923)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Stevens v. Arnold, 262 U.S. 266 (1923)

Stevens v. Arnold

No. 200

Argued May 2, 1923

Decided May 21, 1923

262 U.S. 266


1. A suit under 4 N.J.Comp.Stat. p. 5399, to determine title to land, must be dismissed, according to the interpretation of the highest New Jersey court, if the plaintiff fail to show title in himself, even though the defendant set up an independent title, and although the statute provides for a decree conclusively settling the rights of all the parties. P. 262 U. S. 268.

2. Dismissal of the bill in such case estops the plaintiff from asserting against the same defendant, in a second suit, any ground of title existing at the time of the first suit, especially one that was then waived. P. 262 U. S. 268.

3. Such dismissal does not establish the title set up by the defendant; but he may reassert it by counterclaim in a second suit

Page 262 U. S. 267

brought by the plaintiff, and, in so doing, doe not waive the benefit of the former decree as an adjudication against the plaintiff's title. P. 262 U. S. 269.

4. In New Jersey, a grant by the land flowed by the tide revokes the license to riparian owners to wharf out or otherwise encroach upon the tract granted, but it does not prevent them from gaining title by accretion, even though the grant be described by metes and bounds. P. 262 U. S. 269.

5. Lands formed by accretions of the sea upon a convex shore held bounded not by lines spreading fan-wise from riparian boundaries, but by a city street extending through the accreted tract as shown on a plan adopted before the accretions took place. P. 262 U. S. 270.

273 F. 1022 reversed.

Certiorari to a decree of the circuit court of appeals affirming a decree of the district court against the present petitioner, in a suit brought by respondents' decedent to quiet title to a parcel of land.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.