Putney v. Lapham
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Trespass on the case, for damages to the plaintiff’s premises in Lowell, described in the writ. The only plea was the general issue.
Read the full summary
Trespass on the case, for damages to the plaintiff’s premises in Lowell, described in the writ. The only plea was the general issue. Referees, to whom the cause was referred under a rule of court, reported that during the time of the alleged trespasses, the plaintiff’s wife, Sophia Putney, held a life lease of the premises, which were at the time in the occupation of certain tenants at will, and that the plaintiff and one Margaret Putney were tenants in common of the reversion That the plaintiff had the general charge of the premises, and collected the rents, and that the defendant, in…
1Opinion of the CourtMetcalf, J.
Upon examining the papers in this case, we find that the action submitted to the referees was an action of trespass on the case, and not trespass vi et armis. This fact renders the award obscure. But we understand it, as the parties have construed it in their arguments, namely, to be an award that the plaintiff shall recover one dollar, if, on the facts found by the referees, the action which was submitted to them can be maintained. And the decision of this question depends on two other questions. The first is, whether a reversioner, during the continuance of the particular estate, can…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Thompson v. HoskinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cherry v. Canal Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Crowder v. Fordyce Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1910