Currier v. Barker
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Action on Rev. Sts. c. 104, §§ 2, 4, to recover possession of premises in Charlestown, alleged to be held by the defendant unlawfully and without right.
Read the full summary
Action on Rev. Sts. c. 104, §§ 2, 4, to recover possession of premises in Charlestown, alleged to be held by the defendant unlawfully and without right. Writ dated August 9th 1851. At the trial in the court of common pleas, it appeared in evidence that the defendant, on the 2d of August 1851, held possession of the premises under an oral agreement with the plaintiffs, whereby the rent of the demanded premises was to be paid weekly ; and that the plaintiffs, on said 2d of August, gave the following notice to T-he defendant: “ Charlestown, August 2d 1851. To John T. Barker. You being in…
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, C. J.
The only question in the present case is, whether the notice to quit, given by the plaintiffs to the defendant, was sufficient.
It has long been settled in this commonwealth, that al estates and interests in lands, created or conveyed without any instrument in writing signed by the grantor or his attorney, shall have the force and effect of estates at will only; and this was embraced in the revised statutes, as a revision and reenactment of former provisions to the same effect. Rev. Sts. c. 59, § 29. From this provision it is manifest that the parol agreement between the parties, by which the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Brown v. PerkinsMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2001
- Brown v. PerkinsMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2001