Alexander v. Gould
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a real action, in which Alexander demanded divers parcels of land. He declared upon his own seisin within 30 years, and the disseisin of the tenant within that time. The tenant pleaded the general issue, viz. “ that he did not disseise the said A. ia manner and form, &c.”
Read the full summary
This was a real action, in which Alexander demanded divers parcels of land. He declared upon his own seisin within 30 years, and the disseisin of the tenant within that time. The tenant pleaded the general issue, viz. “ that he did not disseise the said A. ia manner and form, &c.” The demandant relied on a judgment recovered by him against one Linnell for $1132 13 cents, upon whicli an execution issued, and was levied upon the lands October 2, 1800, and registered the 15th day of the same month. The tenant claimed title to the demanded premises by virtue of a deed to himself from said…
1Opinion of the Court
But the Court (Strong, Sedgwick, and Thacher, justices) ruled .that the evidence was inadmissible. Sedgwick, J., said the circumstances did not, as yet, appear to be strong enough.
The counsel for Gould, to shorten the case, immediately gave in evidence the declarations of the demandant, by which it clearly appeared that the note itself had been given to Osmer, and endorsed to Alexander, upon a corrupt agreement, between Alexander and Linnett, respecting false testimony given, or to have been given, in a court of justice. Upon which, the Court said that it was of no consequence, in the present…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Kieth v. KerrIndiana Supreme Court · 1861
- Wynne v. GlidewellIndiana Supreme Court · 1861
- Brooks v. . WilsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Thrasher v. HainesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1822
- Gamble v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1845
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.