Jackson v. Rogers
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of ejectment for a store and lot at Kinderhook, on a demise laid 1st June, 1795. The application was to set aside a verdict for the P^a^nt"iff, and grant a new trial.&emdash;The facts of the "case were these, Lawrens Van Alen was in possession of the premises for a period of more than 30 years before the bringing of the present suit.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment for a store and lot at Kinderhook, on a demise laid 1st June, 1795. The application was to set aside a verdict for the P^a^nt"iff, and grant a new trial.&emdash;The facts of the "case were these, Lawrens Van Alen was in possession of the premises for a period of more than 30 years before the bringing of the present suit. John C. Holland married his daughter, and was a drunke-n dissipated character, frequently requesting Lawrens for a deed ^ie premises, and was as often refused ; at last, he, Lawrens, said to him, and but once, “ well John, you may take the…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam, delivered, by Kent, J.
In the argument for a new trial in this cause on behalf of the defendant, it was contended that the lessor of the plaintiff ought not to recover:
1st. Because the lease from Holland to McMechen amounted to a disseisin of Lawrens J. Van Alen, and destroyed his capacity to devise.
2d. That the second lease from Holland to McMechen, was still subsisting at the commencement of the suit, and was a lawful impediment to the plaintiff’s recovery.
*3163d. That the defendant was at all events tobe deemed a tenant from, year to year, and so entitled to six months notice to quit.
2Cited by6 opinions
- Frost & Dickinson v. BrisbinNew York Supreme Court · 1837
- Crawford v. WilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Houghton v. AultNew York Supreme Court · 1858
- Chaine v. WilsonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1858
- Palmieri v. AntinozziNew York Supreme Court · 1905
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.