Copeland v. Copeland
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On the following exceptions to the ruling of Tenney J : — “ This was an action of ejectment for an undivided half of a farm in Dexter.
Read the full summary
On the following exceptions to the ruling of Tenney J : — “ This was an action of ejectment for an undivided half of a farm in Dexter. “ The plaintiff introduced a warranty deed of the premises, Royal Copeland to Joseph T. Copeland, dated May 10, 1836, acknowledged July 5, 1836, recorded April 7, 1837 ; mortgage deed, Joseph T. Copeland to Calvin Copeland, dated July 5, 1836, acknowledged July 6, 1836, recorded July 11, 1836 ; warranty deed, Joseph T. Copeland to C. Copeland, dated Sept. 11, 1840, acknowledged Sept. 11, 1840, recorded Sept. 16, 1840. “ The tenant then introduced a mortgage…
1Opinion of the Court
W hitman C. J.
— The action is in a plea of land, and of course is of proceeding at law, and not in equity The plaintiff therefore must make out a legal title to the demanded premises. His claim is under Joseph T. Copeland, the son of the defendant; first under a deed of mortgage bearing date July 6, 1836 ; secondly, under an absolute deed, containing a general warranty, under date of 11th of September, 1840; both recorded soon after their dates. If Joseph had a clear *538title to the premises at the time he executed these deeds, the plaintiff’s right to recover would be unquestionable.
But it…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Welland Canal Co. v. HathawayNew York Supreme Court · 1832
3Cited by14 opinions
- Brant v. Virginia Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Maine National Bank v. Morse (In Re Morse)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the First Circuit · 1983
- Lindsay v. CooperSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
- Farmers' & Merchants' Bank of Clay Center v. FarwellCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1893
- Gull River Lumber Co. v. KeefeSupreme Court Of The Territory Of Dakota · 1889
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.