Legal Opinion

Vumbacco v. Papallo

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 5, 1925PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBeach, J.

By the common law the tenant under a deed poll was not estopped to deny the title of his landlord. “And the reason of this is, for that in every contract there must be quid pro quo, for contractus est quasi actus contra actum; and therefore if the lessor hath nothing in the land, the lessee hath not quid pro quo, nor anything for which he should pay rent.” 1 Co. Litt. (Ed. 1853) Sect. 58, 47 b. But, “if the lease be made by deed indented, then both parties are concluded.” Id. In the latter case, the lessee’s seal imported a consideration which shut his mouth. The modern rule regards the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Camp v. CampSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1824
  2. Thomas v. YoungSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1909

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Sagamore Corporation v. WillcuttSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
  2. Spillinger v. C. O. Miller Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API