White v. Elwell
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions to the ruling of Kent, J. These cases were tried together. They were trespass for breaking and entering .the plaintiff’s barn and carrying away his hay. The taking of the hay was admitted. The evidence showed that the plaintiff owned a farm with a barn upon it, in the town of Weld, where the acts complained of were committed.
Read the full summary
On Exceptions to the ruling of Kent, J. These cases were tried together. They were trespass for breaking and entering .the plaintiff’s barn and carrying away his hay. The taking of the hay was admitted. The evidence showed that the plaintiff owned a farm with a barn upon it, in the town of Weld, where the acts complained of were committed. At the trial, the plaintiff claimed, and introduced evidence tending to show that, in July, 1859, he contracted orally with the defendant Elwell to cut the hay on his farm, and put it into the barn, and also cut the bushes upon a certain lot; that it was…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Davis, J.
It is admitted by the counsel for the plaintiff that, upon the findings of the jury, the rights of Pratt and Elwell were those of “tenants at will.” This is correct. Cheever v. Rearson, 16 Pick., 266. Such a right would continue until the property was removed, (unless sooner terminated by a notice under the statute therefor,) if the property should be removed within a reasonable time. Gilmore v. Wilbur, 12 Pick., 120.
*364If Elwell and Pratt put the hay into the plaintiff’s barn by his permission, they had the right, after it was divided, to enter…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Powers v. HarlowMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Sterling v. WardenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1871
- Yockey v. NornMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
- W. T. Walker Furniture Co. v. DysonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1908