Hart v. Bouton
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Action on the Pub. Sts. c. 175, to recover possession of certain premises in Holyoke. Writ dated August 3, 1889. The case was submitted to the Superior Court, and, after judgment for the plaintiff, to this court, on appeal, on agreed facts, in substance as follows.
Read the full summary
Action on the Pub. Sts. c. 175, to recover possession of certain premises in Holyoke. Writ dated August 3, 1889. The case was submitted to the Superior Court, and, after judgment for the plaintiff, to this court, on appeal, on agreed facts, in substance as follows. The plaintiff was given a good and sufficient lease in writing of the premises in question by one Whitcomb, the owner thereof, for the term of one year, from November 20, 1888. On January 14, 1889, the plaintiff and Henry C. Bouton, husband of the defendant, entered into copartnership to carry on the business of. manufacturing…
1Opinion of the CourtC. Allen, J.
There being no evidence of a forcible entry and detainer, it was necessary for the plaintiff to show, in the first place, that the defendant was “a person holding under such lessee” of the premises, within the meaning of the Pub. Sts. c. 175, § 1. It has recently been held that there must have been an actual demise of the premises, and that one who is merely in possession under a contract of purchase is not subject to the summary statutory process for ejection. Kiernan v. Linnehan, 151 Mass. 543.
In the present case, the firm consisting of Hart and Bouton, under the name of the “ Holyoke File…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Coughlin v. GrayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- King v. LawsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Kiernan v. LinnehanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Clark v. WheelockMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Casey v. KingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
3Cited by3 opinions
- Snider v. DebanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
- Alworth v. GordonsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Ferrigno v. O'ConnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944