McClarigan v. Matlack
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Keller, J.,
Plaintiff was tenant of defendant’s farm for the year beginning March 1, 1927. The evidence on both side's establishes this. If he entered into possession before the terms of the lease had been finally settled, he may have been, at the outset, a trespasser, but he did not become a cropper, as contended by defendant’s counsel at the argument. She subsequently recognized his tenancy by issuing a distress warrant for rent against him. A cropper is one hired to work land, to be compensated by a share of the produce. He has no interest in the land but receives his share, after…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Fry v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1829
- Rinehart v. OlwineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843
- Long v. SeaversSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Forsythe v. PriceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
- Steel v. FrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Florig v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- McJunkin v. KinerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
- Zug v. Watson, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Franklin County1933