Jackson ex dem. Bryant v. Ketchum
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of ejectment, for land in B-uns- . Mick, in the county of Rensselaer. I he cause was'tried, at the Rensselaer circuit, on the 5th June last, before Mr. Justice Spencer'. Both parties claimed to hold under Nor is Pearce.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment, for land in B-uns- . Mick, in the county of Rensselaer. I he cause was'tried, at the Rensselaer circuit, on the 5th June last, before Mr. Justice Spencer'. Both parties claimed to hold under Nor is Pearce. A r judgment was recovered . the 29th Feb uarit, 1808, by “L 6 James Cox against Norris Pearce, an absconding debtor, on which a fi. fa. was issued, by virtue of which the sheriff sold the premises in question, and executed a dted for the same to Cox, dated the 22d August, 1808. Cox gave a deed of quitclaim for the same land, to the ° * lessor of the…
1Per curiam
The principal question is, whethe deed from Cox to Bryant is not void. It was executed bn the 14th July, 1810. It was a quitclaim deed^ and for the consideration of 300 dollars-, and it purported to convey lands -worth 2,500 dollars. A verdict in ejecthierit for the lands in question, had passed against Cox-, at the circuit court, in June-, preceding the sale, and -Bryant, at the time of the purchase, knew of the trial and verdict.
Upon these facts, we consider the deed tó be void, under the act to prevent and punish champerty and maintenance. (Laws, vol. 1. 343.) The first section declares, “…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Lytle v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1856
- West v. RaymondIndiana Supreme Court · 1863
- Diamond v. Lawrence CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1861
- Arents v. Long Island RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Frazier v. HarrisIndiana Supreme Court · 1875
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.