Suffern v. Townsend
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of trespass quare clausu~m fregit, and for cutting and carrying away trees, &c. Plea, not guilty, with notice that the defendant would give in evidence, at the trial, a license to cut and carry away the timber and treeS, &c.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of trespass quare clausu~m fregit, and for cutting and carrying away trees, &c. Plea, not guilty, with notice that the defendant would give in evidence, at the trial, a license to cut and carry away the timber and treeS, &c. The cause was tried, at the Orange circuit, on the 12th of September, 1811. The plaintiff having proved the entering, and cutting, and carrying away the trees, &c. the defendant offered to give in evidence, in bar of the plaintiff's action, that at the time of the trespass complained of, lie was in possession of the locus in quo, by virtue of aparol…
1Per curiam
The defence set up as a bar to the action was properly overruled. The agreement to purchase and convey did not, of itself, amount to a license to enter. It was a mere executory agreement. And even if a license to enter had been shown, it would not have been sufficient, without showing a further license to cut and consume the timber. The one license does by no means imply the other. The defendant could not have pretended to have been in possession, in any higher character than a tenant at will, as the agreement for the purchase of the premises was by parol, and if a tenant at will cuts timber,…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Chappell v. McKnightIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
- Harris v. . FrinkNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Dolittle v. EddyNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- North-Western Iron Co. v. MeadeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1867
- Eggleston v. New York & Harlem Rail RoadNew York Supreme Court · 1859
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.