Parkman v. Crosby
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Writ of entry. The plaintiff declared upon his own seisin and a disseisin by the defendants. Plea, nul disseisin. At the trial, before Wilde J., it appeared, that the plaintiff claimed under Porter Crosby, who, on July 27, 1831, conveyed to him the demanded premises.
Read the full summary
Writ of entry. The plaintiff declared upon his own seisin and a disseisin by the defendants. Plea, nul disseisin. At the trial, before Wilde J., it appeared, that the plaintiff claimed under Porter Crosby, who, on July 27, 1831, conveyed to him the demanded premises. The deed was recorded on September 15, 1832. The defendants claimed the demanded premises, under an attachment made, on March 21, 1832, by virtue of a writ dated March 21, 1831, which was issued in their favor against Porter Crosby. Judgment was rendered at the October term 1832, of the Court of Common Pleas, in such action,…
1Opinion of the Court
Wilde J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. Two objections are made to the tenants’ title : 1. That the writ of attachment under which they claim was rendered null and void by reason of certain erasures and alterations made therein without authority ; and 2. If not so, that the same was *300void because several terms of the Court of Common Pleas intervened between the date and the return day of the writ. The first objection has been recently considered in the case of Gardner v. Webber, in the county of Norfolk, in which a similar objection was raised ; and it was decided, after a full argument,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Olmsted v. HoytSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1810
- Livermore v. BoswellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808