Thayer v. Smith
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a writ of entry in the post, wherein the demandants claim an undivided moiety of several parcels of land in Roxbury, and count on the seisin of Benjamin Baker, their ancestor, and upon a disseisin by one John Baker. Trial upon the general issue, before Wilde, J., at the last February term in this county.
Read the full summary
This was a writ of entry in the post, wherein the demandants claim an undivided moiety of several parcels of land in Roxbury, and count on the seisin of Benjamin Baker, their ancestor, and upon a disseisin by one John Baker. Trial upon the general issue, before Wilde, J., at the last February term in this county. On the 21st of August, 1786, the said Benjamin Baker and others conveyed the demanded premises to the said John Baker in fee; who, on the same day, reconveyed the same to the said Benjamin and others in fee. These last grantees, on the same day, made a deed of defeasance, whereby the…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
A bare entry, although in the presence of witnesses, is not sufficient for the purpose of foreclosing an equity of redemption. The entry must be open, and peaceable, and actual posses*349sion must be taken. The object intended by the law is, that the mortgagor may know when the three years commence, beyond which his right to redeem will cease.
The memorandum placed upon the record can make no difference. As it is not required by law to be recorded, the mortgagor had no reason to inquire at the registry for it. Nothing short of actual notice to the mortgagor will supply the want of a…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Fletcher v. CaryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Bennett v. ConantMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1852
- Swift v. MendellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1851
- Howard v. HandySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1857
- Shapley v. RangeleyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1846
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.