Potter v. Baker
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Writ op entry sur disseizin, to recover possession of land in Loudon, in the county of Merrimack. Plea 1st. Nul disseizin. 2. A former verdict and judgment obtained by the defendant, at the September Term, 1832, of the Superior Court for the county of Merrimack, against one Richard Potter, in an action of trespass for taking and carrying away certain shooks of rye, to which said Richard Potter pleaded not guilty; and that in the trial of that issue, the question of the title…
Read the full summary
Writ op entry sur disseizin, to recover possession of land in Loudon, in the county of Merrimack. Plea 1st. Nul disseizin. 2. A former verdict and judgment obtained by the defendant, at the September Term, 1832, of the Superior Court for the county of Merrimack, against one Richard Potter, in an action of trespass for taking and carrying away certain shooks of rye, to which said Richard Potter pleaded not guilty; and that in the trial of that issue, the question of the title of the present defendant, or of Richard Potter, to the premises now demanded, was distinctly raised and considered and…
1Opinion of the Court
Wilcox J.
The ease Whittemore v. Shaw, 8 N. H. Rep. 393, settles the question that this special plea cannot be sustained. The demandant alleges generally that he is seized, without setting out the particulars of his title. The tenant cannot set up a particular title for him, allege that the demandant claims under that title, and then plead matter of estoppel under it. If, when the demandant’s title is shown, the tenant has matter of estoppel against it, he may give it in evidence, having had no opportunity to plead it.fc Adams v. Barnes, 17 Mass. 365; 1 Stark. Ev. 303.
But a fact found by a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- King v. ChaseSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844
- Towns v. NimsSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1830
- Whittemore v. ShawSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1836
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ritchie v. GloverSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1876