Morgan v. Stell
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
THIS was an ejectment for a lot of land containing about four acres, in the Northern Liberties of Philadelphia, tried before Brackenridge J. at a Nisi Prius in November 1811, when a verdict was found for the defendant.
Read the full summary
THIS was an ejectment for a lot of land containing about four acres, in the Northern Liberties of Philadelphia, tried before Brackenridge J. at a Nisi Prius in November 1811, when a verdict was found for the defendant. Upon a motion for a new trial by the plaintiff, his honour now reported the material facts as follows: On the 12th of December 1797, Turner Camac and wife, (the real plaintiffs in the cause) then residing in Ireland, sent out to this country one Nicholas Halliday, under a joint and several power of attorney to him and Thomas Laix>, to enter upon the lands of the wife in the…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
after stating the facts, delivered his opinion as follows:
It is contended on the part of the plaintiff, that the second power, differing essentially from the first, operated as an implied revocation from the moment that Halliday received notice of it, and that consequently the lease under which the defendant claims, was made without authority. On the other hand, the defendant urges, that being a purchaser for valuable consideration without notice of the revocation of the first power, the plaintiff ought not to recover against him. There is no doubt but that as between the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Dalzell v. Crawford, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1842
- Lessee of Albertson v. RobesonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1764