Jackson ex dem. Antell v. Brown
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of ejectment. The cause was tried at the Herkimer circuit, in 1807, before Mr. Justice Van Hess, The lessors of the plaintiff claimed 65 acres of land, off the north end of great lot no. 10. in GlerHs pur-' chase, of which the defendant was in possession. The premises in question are comprehended in 375 - acres of land, which belonged to the heirs of Alexander Golden, deceased, being six in number, as tenants in common.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment. The cause was tried at the Herkimer circuit, in 1807, before Mr. Justice Van Hess, The lessors of the plaintiff claimed 65 acres of land, off the north end of great lot no. 10. in GlerHs pur-' chase, of which the defendant was in possession. The premises in question are comprehended in 375 - acres of land, which belonged to the heirs of Alexander Golden, deceased, being six in number, as tenants in common. In February, 1805, a petition for the partition of "iii • • the land was made,- ot which due notice was given for the ensuing May term, according to the…
1Opinion of the CourtYates, J.
Two questions arise in this cause.
1. Whether the want of notice to the defendant, being a co-tenant, does not avoid the partition ?
2. If the partition cannot be maintained, whether the lessors of the plaintiff, or either of them are, notwithstanding, entitled to recover an undivided part, as tenants in common ?
By the first section of the act for the partition of lands, passed the 7th April, 1801,* it is directed, that á copy of the petition shall be served, 40 days previous to the term in which the same shall be presented to the court, on all parties concerned, who shall not join in such…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Richards v. RoteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
- Doe v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1849
- Noble v. CromwellNew York Supreme Court · 1858