Doe ex dem. Pearsal v. Thorp
Supreme Court of Vermont
THIS was an action of ejectment for two hundred acres of land in the town of Charlotte, being the - division of the original Right of Jonathan Aikens. Plea — The General Issue.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment for two hundred acres of land in the town of Charlotte, being the - division of the original Right of Jonathan Aikens. Plea — The General Issue. The plaintiff made a clear title to the Right of Jonathan Aikens in Charlotte, in the lessor, a severance among the proprietors, by which, the lot of land demanded was legally divided to the Right of skid Aikens ; and also proved the defendant in possession. stated that one Howlet purchased the lot in question of -Walbridge, entered into posession and improved the same, as early as June, 1785. — That he continued in…
1Opinion of the Court
The Court permitted the defendant to proceed with parol proof. Upon which the Chief Justice said that he concurred, because such had been the precedents in this Court. He was unwilling, therefore, to surprise the party, by altering the decisions at the moment of trial. He did not, however, see the distinction on which the decisions in this case were founded. It was true that the possession of land might be transferred without deed, but it might be also by deed; and if it be made by deed, the deed will prove it, and is surely better evidence than parol proof, according to the general rule of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Aldrich v. GriffithSupreme Court of Vermont · 1893
- Doolittle v. LinsleySupreme Court of Vermont · 1827