Legal Opinion

Embree v. Ellis

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1807PublishedCited by 20 opinions

This was an action to recover, dower, in lands, in the county of Westchester. The cause was tried before Mr. Justice Livingston, at the circuit in Westchester, the 23d May, 1805. The demandant’s count was in the usual ■form. The defendant pleaded that the husband of the demandant was never seized of such an estate, as he could endow the demandant of, on the day of their marriage, nor at any time since. To this plea, there was a •a replication of seisin in the husband, &c.

Read the full summary

This was an action to recover, dower, in lands, in the county of Westchester. The cause was tried before Mr. Justice Livingston, at the circuit in Westchester, the 23d May, 1805. The demandant’s count was in the usual ■form. The defendant pleaded that the husband of the demandant was never seized of such an estate, as he could endow the demandant of, on the day of their marriage, nor at any time since. To this plea, there was a •a replication of seisin in the husband, &c. From the evidence produced at the trial, on the part of the demandant, the following facts appeared. One Gerardus Wilisie…

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

The principle question in this case is, whether a sufficient seisin in the demandant’s husband has been shown, to entitle her to dower. Lewis Morris, the son, had been possessed of the premises in question, by receiving the rents and profits thereof for ten years; he then conveyed them in foe to the demandant’s husband, who continued in possession for ten or twelve years, until they were sold under an execution against him, and purchased by Lewis Morris, the son. These facts were clearly sufficient,prima facie, to entitle the demandant to a recovery. Nothing, we think, was shown on the part…

2Cited by20 opinions

  1. The CaledoniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  2. Commercial Molasses Corp. v. New York Tank Barge Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
  3. The Arctic BirdDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1901
  4. Stephenson v. Piscataqua Fire & Marine InsuranceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1866
  5. Chadwick v. DennistonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1887

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API