Ham v. Kendall
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort against Stephen C. Kendall, Willard Walcott and Darius Dow, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close and demolishing his ice-house.
Read the full summary
Tort against Stephen C. Kendall, Willard Walcott and Darius Dow, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close and demolishing his ice-house. The case was submitted to the judgment of the Superior Court, on facts agreed substantially as follows : In December 1866 Lucius Angier made an oral agreement with William Cumston, who was then the owner of the premises, that he might put an ice-house thereon and that it might remain there five years, and he built the ice-house accordingly. In order to set the building the earth was dug away and levelled, and the floor was laid upon stones and posts…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
When the ice-house was erected upon the land under the agreement, it was personal property. The sales, whether of the land or the building, did not change its character in this respect. No notice to remove it was given to its owner, and he had a right to go upon the land and remove it, and appropriate the materials to his own use.
Judgment for the defendants.
2Cited by6 opinions
- Rogers v. CoxIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Little v. WillfordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Griffin v. RansdellIndiana Supreme Court · 1880
- Hartwell v. KellyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Pope v. SkinkleSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1883
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.