Sanford v. Button
Supreme Court of Connecticut
MOTION for a new trial. This was an action of ejectment, commenced on the ■ 9th of March, 1809. The defendant pleaded the general issue; and on the trjaj appeared, that John Granisa died seised of the r premises in 1746, intestate.
Read the full summary
MOTION for a new trial. This was an action of ejectment, commenced on the ■ 9th of March, 1809. The defendant pleaded the general issue; and on the trjaj appeared, that John Granisa died seised of the r premises in 1746, intestate. They descended to eight children, his heirs at law, one of whom, Priscilla, was mother of Lydia Sanford, one of the plaintiffs. t 1 Priscilla was born in 1720, married in 1739, and died a covert in 1753; at which time the premises descended to her children, the present plaintiffs, subject to her husband’^ curtesy, who died in 1758. Lydia was born in 1745, and…
1Opinion of the CourtReeve, J.
(after stating the case.) Whether the; co-verture of Lydia can protect her right or not since her title accrued to her whilst a minor unmarried, I do not find necessary to determine.
This is a joint suit by several heirs; and it is claimed that the minority or coverture of one saves all the rights of the other heirs. There can be no' question but the rule of the common law on a joint suit is, that the minority, &c. of one will save the rights of those of full age; for the recovery must be joint, and no one without the other can recover. And as the rights of the minor are secured, he must…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Whittlesey v. FullerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
- Alsop v. RussellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1871
- Lessee of Moore v. ArmstrongOhio Supreme Court · 1840
- Hughes v. Fairfield Lumber and Supply Co.Connecticut Superior Court · 1954