Crary v. Goodman
New York Supreme Court
This was an action for the recovery of real property, tried at the Cattaraugus circuit court in January, 1850. The plaintiff proved the title to the land in question to be in himself, and that the defendant was in possession.
Read the full summary
This was an action for the recovery of real property, tried at the Cattaraugus circuit court in January, 1850. The plaintiff proved the title to the land in question to be in himself, and that the defendant was in possession. The defendant set up in his answer, that he was in possession as the tenant of one Daniel Huntly; that the land in controversy adjoined land of which Huntly had the title ; that Huntly’s purchase in fact included the land in question, which was owned by his grantor j that both parties supposed that it was included in the deed to Huntly, but by mistake it was omitted.…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Sill, P. J.
Prior to the adoption of the code of procedure, the defendant’s equitable claim would not have constituted a defense to the action. That it would is not pretended. But it is supposed by the defendant’s counsel, that now, an equitable right in the defendant, to a conveyance, is sufficient to defeat an action for the possession, founded on a legal title in the plaintiff. It is contended that the object and effect of the 69th section of the code, was not only to introduce a form of proceeding adapted to the enforcement of both legal and equitable rights, but to abolish…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Buell v. IrwinMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
- Crary v. . GoodmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1855
- Pacific Biscuit Co. v. DuggerOregon Supreme Court · 1902
- Crary v. GoodmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1855