Austin v. Kimball
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Ejectment. Writ dated December 21,1894. Trial in the Superior Court, before Hammond, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. The plaintiffs sought to recover possession of a room known as No. 32 North Market Street in Boston.
Read the full summary
Ejectment. Writ dated December 21,1894. Trial in the Superior Court, before Hammond, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. The plaintiffs sought to recover possession of a room known as No. 32 North Market Street in Boston. On December 13,1890, Durgin, Park, and Company, who were the lessees of “ the brick and granite store building situated and numbered 31 on North Market Street,” subleased, with the consent of their landlords, to one Sanborn the first floor and cellar of the building. The first floor was entered from the street by two doors numbered 31 and 32. The…
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
Sanborn was lessor to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs had sublet No. 32 to Barnard and Company with Sanborn’s consent, and Barnard and Company had assigned their lease to Wilkins. The plaintiffs accepted Wilkins as tenant in place of Barnard and Company, but it does not appear whether or not Sanborn consented to the assignment to Wilkins.
The defendant Kimball took Sanborn’s title, and entered upon No. 32 for breach of the condition of the lease from Sanborn to the plaintiffs; Kimball thus stood in Sanborn’s place. Wilkins *302yielded possession ; but it does not appear whether he was bound to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Holbrook v. YoungMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Hodgkins v. PriceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
- Towne v. ButterfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Cobb v. LavalleIllinois Supreme Court · 1878
3Cited by1 opinion
- Yates v. KaplanCivil Court of the City of New York · 1973