Murray v. Garretson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ON the trial of this cause, which was an ejectment in die form prescribed by the acts of assembly of 21st March, 1806, and 13th April, 1807, before Gibson J. at Nisi Prius, it appeared in evidence, that during the pendency of the suit, tiie plaintiff had conveyed the title to another person, whereupon the defendant moved for a nonsuit, which his Honour directed to be entered, with leave to the plaintiff to move to take it off, if the Court in Bank should be of opinion, that…
Read the full summary
ON the trial of this cause, which was an ejectment in die form prescribed by the acts of assembly of 21st March, 1806, and 13th April, 1807, before Gibson J. at Nisi Prius, it appeared in evidence, that during the pendency of the suit, tiie plaintiff had conveyed the title to another person, whereupon the defendant moved for a nonsuit, which his Honour directed to be entered, with leave to the plaintiff to move to take it off, if the Court in Bank should be of opinion, that he was entitled to proceed to recover damages and costs, notwithstanding the title was out of him at the time of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Duncan J.
This was an ejectment by writ, pursuant to the act of 21st March, 1806, and 13th April, 1807. The plaintiff shewed title in himself at the time of the commencement of the action, and the defendant produced in evidence a conveyance by a third person of the premises subsequent thereto. The opinion of the Judge who tried the cause was taken, whether the plaintiff could proceed to recover damages ánd costs, the title being out of him at the time of the trial. .The Judge expressed an opinion that he could not, whereupon the plaintiff suffered a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Fenn v. StilleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1792