Malcom v. Rogers
New York Supreme Court
In a writ of right; the count began thus : “ Richard M. Malcom, 5 messuages, After a special imparlance.(a) the defendant pleaded in abatement to the writ, that neither the brothers and sisters surviving, nor William M. were named in the writ, nor SUed together with the demandant, . . General demurrer and jomder.(b)
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per Sutherland, J.
The general rule is that tenants in common cannot join, or be joined in real or mixed actions, unless in the case where some entire or indivisible thing is to be recovered. (Co. Litt. 197, b.) Their freeholds are several, and they claim by several and distinct titles. (Litt. sect. 311. 2 Bl. Com. 194. Com. Dig. tit. Abatement, (E. 10,) (F. 6.) There is neither a privity of title, nor an union and entirety of interest, as between joint tenants, which render it necessary for the latter ,to unite, generally, in all real and mixed actions. It was formerly held, that…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Steines v. Franklin CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Medbury v. . SwanNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Commonwealth ex rel. Hamilton v. Select & Common CouncilsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859
- Van Shaack v. RobbinsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1873
- Gilmore v. . City of UticaNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.