Howland v. Coffin
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of debt for rent from June 3, 1823, to December 3, 1824, and from June 3, 1825, to December 3-, 1829, at $75 a year. It was agreed that the premises for which the rent was claimed, were, on May 6, 1822, the property of Uriah Brown-ell, who, on that day, by an instrument under seal, demised the same to one John Randolph for the term of twelve years from that date, Randolph yielding rent therefor at the rate of $ 75 a year, payable semi-annually.
Read the full summary
This was an action of debt for rent from June 3, 1823, to December 3, 1824, and from June 3, 1825, to December 3-, 1829, at $75 a year. It was agreed that the premises for which the rent was claimed, were, on May 6, 1822, the property of Uriah Brown-ell, who, on that day, by an instrument under seal, demised the same to one John Randolph for the term of twelve years from that date, Randolph yielding rent therefor at the rate of $ 75 a year, payable semi-annually. The defendant purchased all the right which Randolph had in the premises, and afterwards the plaintiffs purchased all the right…
1Opinion of the Court
Wilde J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. We entertain no doubt, notwithstanding the dictum in Walker's case, 3 Co. Rep. 22, that this action is well maintained. The only point of defence now made was recently decided by this Court in an action between the same parties, and we have heard nothing since to change the opinion we then formed. The action is founded on a privity of estate between the parties. *130The defendant took the term subject to all the advantages and disadvantages attached to it by the terms of the lease. The covenant for the payment of rent ran with the land and by the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Ascarete v. PfaffCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1904