Carpenter v. Hollister
Supreme Court of Vermont
Ejectment, to recover the seizin and possession of certain lands in Marshfield. Plea, not guilty, and trial by jury. On the trial below, the plaintiff proved that the title of the premises was in the plaintiff’s intestate prior to the twenty-ninth day of December, 1830, and that the defendant, Austin, was in possession, as the tenant of Hollister, the other defendant, at the commencement of this suit.
Read the full summary
Ejectment, to recover the seizin and possession of certain lands in Marshfield. Plea, not guilty, and trial by jury. On the trial below, the plaintiff proved that the title of the premises was in the plaintiff’s intestate prior to the twenty-ninth day of December, 1830, and that the defendant, Austin, was in possession, as the tenant of Hollister, the other defendant, at the commencement of this suit. The defendants then gave in evidence a deed from the intestate to Joshua Mackres, dated December 29, 1830, conveying the land in question, and a deed from said Mackres to the defendant,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Collamer, J.
On the trial, the admissions of Mackres, who is still living and was afterwards a witness in the case, made while he was in possession and before his deed to Hol-lister, were received to prove the insanity of Taylor, who deeded to Mackres. Was this error ?
*555This proceeding is claimed to be sustained on the ground that every concession made by one in possession of land, against his interest, is binding on him and all who claim under him. In this state, and under our registry system, it is understood that the title to land appears of record,…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Ellis v. HowardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Wood v. WillardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1863
- Shaw v. McKenzieSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1932
- Phillips v. LaughlinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1904
- Reed v. RiceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1853
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.