This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P filed an action alleging that they were the owners of certain land located in the town of North Kingstown (D). P claimed that there is a building belonging to them on the land and that D, under the order of the town council, destroyed it. P claimed that the entire building including its foundation was razed and the lot was graded thereby throwing the estate open to the public and obliterating its boundaries. P sought an injunction against D from carrying out its purposes for the land and from further interference with P’s estate and for general relief. P’s bill was filed February 28, 1885. D filed its answer on May 27, 1885, and admitted that it did what was charged. But, D also denied that the lot in question was part of any estate of P and alleged that the land was part and parcel of a public highway and that the building had stood thereon to the sufferance of the town. In a supplemental answer filed September 26, 1886, D alleged that their purposes had been fully carried out and that P cannot maintain its current bill because their remedy is complete at law as the building had been removed and the lot graded. P then filed general replications. D then moved that the bill be dismissed because P had an adequate remedy at law and that P’s bill does not state a case for equitable relief, and even if it did state such a case the building and foundation have been removed, and the lot has been graded, and thus there is no cause of action under equity.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.