Legal Opinion

Starr v. Leavitt

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided November 15, 1817PublishedCited by 12 opinions

THIS was an action of ejectment, to recover an undivided part of two pieces of land, bearing such proportion to the whole as 597.01 bears to 5069.94. The case was as follows. The plaintiff claimed title by virtue of an execution in his favour, against Simeon Mitchell, on which the premises were set off. The first piece lay partly in Roxbury, and partly in Washington ; and the second, wholly in Washington.

Read the full summary

THIS was an action of ejectment, to recover an undivided part of two pieces of land, bearing such proportion to the whole as 597.01 bears to 5069.94. The case was as follows. The plaintiff claimed title by virtue of an execution in his favour, against Simeon Mitchell, on which the premises were set off. The first piece lay partly in Roxbury, and partly in Washington ; and the second, wholly in Washington. They were owned in equal undivided moieties, by the debtor and his brother David Mitchell, during the life-time of the latter, as tenants in common, the titles by which they were held being…

1Opinion of the Court

Swift, Ch. J.

The plaintiff and defendant both claim the land demanded, by the levy of executions upon it, as the estate of Simeon Mitchell; and questions arise respecting their validity.

The defendant has levied upon pari of a piece of land, which Simeon owned as tenant in common with the heirs of David Mitchell; the same has been setoff to him by metes and hounds : and he lias taken the undivided moiety or right of Simeon to the part of the tract so described. This levy is void, according to the prim ¡pies adopted by tins Court, in the case of Hinman v. Leavenworth. Simeon had no such estate…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. HazenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1823
  2. Campau v. GodfreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Drake v. BricknerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
  4. New Haven Trolley & Bus Employees Credit Union v. HillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
  5. Young v. SchroederUtah Supreme Court · 1894

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API