Brown v. Huger,
62 U.S. 305 (1858)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Brown v. Huger, 62 U.S. 21 How. 305 305 (1858)

Brown v. Huger

2 U.S. (21 How.) 305


Where there had been an original entry for land made in the office of the Lord Proprietor of the Northern Neck of Virginia, a survey ordered upon that entry, and actually made and returned, and a patent adopting that survey and founded thereupon, was issued by the Lord Proprietor to a grantee differing in name from the maker of the original entry, these circumstances constitute no ground for vacating or impeaching the legal title vested by the patent.

Page 62 U. S. 306

The construction of the patent is the proper duty of the court, and not of the jury.

It is a universal rule that wherever natural or permanent objects are embraced in the calls of a patent or survey, these have absolute control, and both course and distance must yield to their influence.

Hence, where a survey and patent call for a boundary to run down a river to its point of junction with another, thence up that other, the rivers are obviously intended as the boundaries and courses must be disregarded, especially when it is manifest that one of them has been interpolated through error.

The authorities referred to.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Page 62 U. S. 308

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.