Jackson ex dem. Murray v. Hazen
New York Supreme Court
Tins was an action of ejectment, for a part of great lot No. 23, in Hassenclewoer's patent in the county of Herki-mer. The cause was tried the 22d day of June, 1807, before Mr. Justice Van Ness. The declaration contained separate demises from each of the lessors. There were five defendants, who appeared and entered into the consent rule jointly, and jointly pleaded not guilty. On the trial, they jointly confessed lease, entry, and ouster.
Read the full summary
Tins was an action of ejectment, for a part of great lot No. 23, in Hassenclewoer's patent in the county of Herki-mer. The cause was tried the 22d day of June, 1807, before Mr. Justice Van Ness. The declaration contained separate demises from each of the lessors. There were five defendants, who appeared and entered into the consent rule jointly, and jointly pleaded not guilty. On the trial, they jointly confessed lease, entry, and ouster. Benjamin Hazen, one of the defendants, entered into possession of the premises under a contract for the sale thereof, made with Henry Ellison, one of the…
1Opinion of the CourtSpenoer., J.
It appears, by the case, that there were five tenants in possession of the land .to which the plaintiff claimed title. Three of the defendants occupied part of the lands jointly, but Samuel and Silas Hazen each possessed separate and distinct parcels of the premises. The question isj whether judgment is to bo rendered against all the defendants in consequence of their entering into *441the cousent rule, and pleading jointly, or whether against such only as had a joint possession. The only case which seems to warrant a general judgment against all the defendants, is that of Claxmore v. Searle and…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Haws v. Victoria Copper Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Harrington v. SladeNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Ivey v. CowartSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Aurora Hill Con. Min. Co. v. 85 Mining Co.United States Circuit Court · 1888
- Keene v. BarnesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.