Fitch v. Windram
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Summary process under R. L. c. 181, for the possession of five parcels of land at Millis with the buildings thereon. Writ dated May 16, 1902. . In the Superior Court the case was tried before Braley, J., without a jury. He found that the plaintiff was entitled to the possession of the premises described in the writ and ordered judgment and execution therefor. The defendant alleged exceptions.
Read the full summary
Summary process under R. L. c. 181, for the possession of five parcels of land at Millis with the buildings thereon. Writ dated May 16, 1902. . In the Superior Court the case was tried before Braley, J., without a jury. He found that the plaintiff was entitled to the possession of the premises described in the writ and ordered judgment and execution therefor. The defendant alleged exceptions. The judge made certain findings of fact by which it appeared that the plaintiff had acquired possession of the premises under a certain agreement with one Pillsbury dated October 14, 1899, which is…
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
The agreement of October 14,1899, between Pillsbury and the plaintiff was something more than an agreement upon the part of Pillsbury to sell and on that of the plaintiff to buy the land over which this controversy has arisen. Although it is carelessly drawn, yet so far as material to this case its provisions are sufficiently clear.
After describing the land and stating the amount to be paid and the time and manner in which the deed is to be delivered, it is provided that Pillsbury, the party of the first part, shall not suffer any waste or use of the said estate or receive any benefit…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Barbell v. BrittonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Havens v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
- Glickman v. KastelMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1948