Ladd v. Riggle
Tennessee Supreme Court
FROM MARION. Appeal in error from the judgment of the Circuit Court, March Term, 1871. J. B. Hoyl, J. 1. Plaintiff in error was entitled to notice to quit before suit: citing Shepherd v. Cummings, 1 Col., 354. 2. Evidence of an express contract is essential: citing Code, s. 3344; Bird v. Fannon, 3 Head, 12. 3. The description of the premises is fatally defective : citing Clements v. Clinton, M. & Y., 198. 1. The plaintiff in error went into possession under a tenant of…
Read the full summary
FROM MARION. Appeal in error from the judgment of the Circuit Court, March Term, 1871. J. B. Hoyl, J. 1. Plaintiff in error was entitled to notice to quit before suit: citing Shepherd v. Cummings, 1 Col., 354. 2. Evidence of an express contract is essential: citing Code, s. 3344; Bird v. Fannon, 3 Head, 12. 3. The description of the premises is fatally defective : citing Clements v. Clinton, M. & Y., 198. 1. The plaintiff in error went into possession under a tenant of defendants in error, and therefore falls within the provisions of the Code, s. 3344. 2. The premises are sufficiently…
1Opinion of the CourtNelsoN, J.
On the trial of this action of unlawful entry and detainer, it was proved that, in 1858 or 1859, the defendants in error rented the lands mentioned in the warrant, on certain specified terms, to Alsop & Piérce, by verbal contract; that other persons took possession under Alsop & Pierce; that in 1862 Warren took possession without any contract with defendants in error, and made some improvements on the premises, the defendants in error laboring for him and receiving a daily compensation; that in 1866 he admitted their title in conversation with one of them, and said he xraght to be shot if he…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rhea v. RedusCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1928
- Ranning v. ReevesCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1875