Howard v. Lee
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of trespass qu. cl.fr., tried before the superior court for New London county, at the term holden in January, 1856. On the trial, the plaintiff’s title to the land upon which the alleged trespasses were committed, was in question and became material. The plaintiff offered in support of and as the sole evidence of his title to said land, a deed, of which the material parts are the following.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass qu. cl.fr., tried before the superior court for New London county, at the term holden in January, 1856. On the trial, the plaintiff’s title to the land upon which the alleged trespasses were committed, was in question and became material. The plaintiff offered in support of and as the sole evidence of his title to said land, a deed, of which the material parts are the following. “ Know all men by these presents, that I, Moses W. Com-stock, of the town of Chatham, in the county of Middlesex, guardian to Alonzo C., Cornelia G. and Ellen M. Griswold, and Augustus…
1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.
The plaintiff claims title to certain lands, under a deed executed by the guardian of certain minors, who were the owners, under authority granted for that purpose by the court of probate for the district of East Lyme, within which district the minors resided, and the lands were situated; and the question in the case is, whether the deed is admissible for the purpose of proving the title.
*4The defendant claims that the deed is void, because it does not appear upon its face, that the order to sell was granted upon any petition or application for that purpose, or that any such order was in fact…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lockwood v. SturdevantSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1827
- Watson v. WatsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1834
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hart v. StoneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1861
- Solomon v. WixonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1858