Norwich bulletin., 1921-10-20
SEWER CASE ARGUED
 BEFORE SUPREME COURT

The supreme court of errors concluded its sitting here Wednesday morning, hay ing before it the appeal Of the plaintiff in the case of Mrs. Callia Nj Exley of Plainfield against Timothy Gallivan of this city. The five judges constituting the court were occupied all the morning in hearing the arguments made by Attorneys Telley E. Babcock and Clayton B. Smith for Mrs. Exley and of William H. Shields Jr., for Mir. Gallivon.
 The case came to the supreme court by an appeal from the decision of Judge C. B. Waller of the court or common pleas. whose decision was in favor of Mir. Gal livan.
 The case arose out of the following facts: In 1881 the Norwich Savings so- ciety owned a lot of land in Norwich which in the rear was bounded by land of Elisha Aver, which was higher and faced on High street. About that year, 1881, Aver together with the Norwich Savings society constructed a pipe which l took the sewerage from Ayers land through the Savings Society's land to | the public sewer on Thames street whoch had just been constructed. This pipe ran by the southerly side of the house of the Savings society's land and by a con meeting pipe took the sewerage from a sing inside the house. Since it was con. structed this pipe has taken sewerage from the Aver land and the house that was on it and from other houses on Higt street which have been since connected with it on the Aver land The pipe after it was laid was entirely l(den under ground and continued so until 1919 IT
 1889 the Norwich Savings society con
 veyed to MT Gallivan the Thames street |
 Thames street land he did not know thi.
 pipe from the Aver land nor did he know
 that this pipe was to bring sewerage iron
 the Aver land across the Thames stree
 land until after he conveyed it to Mrs , Exley. On March IT, 1917 MT. Gallival , conveyed the Thames street real estat
 to Mrs. Exley by warranty deed, Mrs
 Exley when she purchased it, having n
 knowledge of this pipe from the Aye land, and there had been since it wa laid up to that time no indication of visible or apparent on or from the Thame . street land nor any mention of it at an ' time on the land records of the town c Q Norwich. More than year after he purchase through the pipe becomin = blocked. Mrs. Exley learned of it fc d the first time and brought the preser
 action claiming the plpe to be an incun f. brance on the Thames street land b, f cause right had arisen in the owners T, the Aver land by adverse use to maintai
 it across the Thames street lanG. an
 that, therefore, it was a breach of u |. covenants in her deed from the defen, 5 ant Judge Waller ruled that there ha
 been no open or notorious use of the piI \, for fifteen years, it being entirely hi, den under ground and that. therefore. I easement in the Thames street land - favor of the Aver land could have be, :, gained, and from this decision Mrs Exl. /. appealed.
 The questions involved before the S s preme court were, first: The questio J,J J involved before the supreme court wer M first. whether there was an easement a ,a quired by adverse possession in favor , the Aver land against the defendant, Ga - livan, to main'/n this pipe across { if Thames street land and whether, If the
 were such an easement would this eas
 ment be good against Mrs. Exley, " TT purchased the Thames street land frc iy MT. Gallivan for value and without a ,iI notice. of the pipe in question.