Legal Opinion

Porter v. Perkins

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 15, 1809PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Ejectment for a parcel of land in Biddeford. The defendants pleaded not guilty to a part which they describe, and a disclaimer as to the residue, and on both pleas issues to the country were joined.

1Opinion of the Court

The cause was submitted without argument, and the opinion of the Court delivered to the following effect by

Parsons, C. J.

This case comes before the Court on a case stated by the parties, whence two questions arise.

The first question is, whether from the facts disclosed in the depositions referred to, it is a presumption of law that a regular pai tition by deed was executed by Bradstreet and Nason, the tenants in common.

It appears that twenty-seven years ago, there was by these tenants a several possession in fact, and that they declared that they had made partition, not expressing whether by…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Porter v. HillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
  2. Perkins v. PittsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
  3. Warren v. ChildsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Porter v. HillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
  2. Perkins v. PittsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
  3. Gray v. JenksU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1825
  4. Warren v. ChildsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
  5. Berry v. SeawallCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API