M'Neil v. Bright
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a writ of right to recover seisin of one undivided fifth part of a messuage and land therein described, alleging that the demandant’s father, Archibald M’Neil, was seised thereof within sixty years past, and that the tenants had no entry, except by Samuel Conant, who disseised the said Archibald.
Read the full summary
This was a writ of right to recover seisin of one undivided fifth part of a messuage and land therein described, alleging that the demandant’s father, Archibald M’Neil, was seised thereof within sixty years past, and that the tenants had no entry, except by Samuel Conant, who disseised the said Archibald. The tenants claim under Richard Chamberlain, who vouched in Joshua Woods, who vouched in the heirs, executors, and administrators, of Samuel Conant, deceased, who have vouched in the commonwealth, who, by the Attorney and Solicitor-General, pursuant to a resolution of the legislature,…
1Opinion of the Court
The cause stood continued for advisement; and now, at this term, *265the opinion of the Court, (the Chief Justice excepted, who had been of counsel in the action,) was delivered as follows by
Sedgwick, J.
By the agreement of the parties, the circum stances, which took place at the trial, are not, in the view which I have taken of the case, important to be stated; as every fact necessary to a right decision of this case appears in the state of facts. which the parties have agreed upon, that the controversy between them may be finally settled upon principles of law.
* The demandant count's on the…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Dunlap v. StetsonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1827
- Clevenger v. FigleySupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
- Farwell v. RogersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Arnold v. BoothWisconsin Supreme Court · 1861
- Attorney-General v. TaggartSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1890
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.