Benedict v. Benedict
Supreme Court of Connecticut
MOTION for a new trial. This was an action of disseisin, fora certain undivided part of a store in Stratford. The defendant pleaded the genera) jssue which, by agreement of the parties was closed to ~ ° * the court. The issue was found for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
MOTION for a new trial. This was an action of disseisin, fora certain undivided part of a store in Stratford. The defendant pleaded the genera) jssue which, by agreement of the parties was closed to ~ ° * the court. The issue was found for the plaintiff. On the trial, before the Superior Court, it was proved, that ' the land on which the store was on cted. belonged to n't/Ham Benedict ; that the store was erected at the joint ex-pence of William Benedict, the owner of the land, and Henry Benedict, by the parol licence of William ; that it was agreed between them, by parol, that they should…
1Opinion of the CourtSwift, J.
When a man builds a house on the land of another, by a mere parol licence or contract, he is, as to the use of the land, a tenant at will. He cannot be viewed in the light of a trespasser; but in strict law, the house belongs to the owner of the soil ; who can, at any time, revoke the licence, and eject the tenant. Of course, the builder of the house, cannot maintain ejectment against I he owner of ihe land.
It has been contended, that the nature of such parol licence is an agreement that the house shall remain on the land, so long as it shall last ; and being executed in part, a court of law…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Prince v. CaseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1835
- Curtiss v. HoytSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1848
- Metcalf v. HartWyoming Supreme Court · 1891
- Frink v. BranchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1844
- Yale v. SeelySupreme Court of Vermont · 1843
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.