Grundy v. Martin
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Action on the Pub. Sts. e. 175, to recover possession of a tract of land, with a dwelling-house thereon, in Stoneham, occupied by the defendants as tenants at will of Thomas G. Grundy and Susanna Bate, who, on September 1, 1888, executed a lease of the premises to the plaintiff. Writ dated November 14, 1888. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Mason, J., the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendants alleged exceptions, which appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, C. J.
The ground taken by the defendants, that the plaintiff’s lessors had no sufficient title to enable them to make a valid lease to the plaintiff, cannot be sustained. The widow of Thomas Grundy (the father of Thomas G. Grundy and Susanna Bate) has a life estate in an undivided half of the premises ; the reversion of this half and the fee of the other undivided half are owned by the lessors. They are entitled to possession against everybody except their tenant in common, the widow, and can give a lease of the premises good as against every one who does not claim under her. Rising v. Stannard, 17…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Cunningham v. PatteeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Rising v. StannardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1821
- Clark v. KeliherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Walker v. SharpeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
3Cited by8 opinions
- Swartzbaugh v. SampsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Johnston v. DelayNevada Supreme Court · 1945
- Lewis v. Welch Wholesale Flour & Feed Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1922
- Ryan v. SylvesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1970
- Tatum v. TownsendDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.