Jackson v. Woods
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of ejectment, for part of lot no. 65. in the township of Milton. There were five defendants, who entered into the consent rule jointly, and pleaded jointly. The case was tried at the Cayuga circuit, the 16th June, 1809, before Mr. Justice Van Ness. Two of the lessors of the plaintiff, proved title to the premises in question, and that the defendants were in possession, in separate and distinct parts, but not jointly.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment, for part of lot no. 65. in the township of Milton. There were five defendants, who entered into the consent rule jointly, and pleaded jointly. The case was tried at the Cayuga circuit, the 16th June, 1809, before Mr. Justice Van Ness. Two of the lessors of the plaintiff, proved title to the premises in question, and that the defendants were in possession, in separate and distinct parts, but not jointly. The jury found each of the defendants guilty, as to that part of the premises in his separate possession, and not guilty, as to the other parts in the…
1Opinion of the Court
Kent, Ch. J.
delivered the opinion of the court. This was an ejectment for part of lot no. 65. in Milton. All the defendants entered into the consent rule joindy, and pleaded jointly, and the jury found them all guilty, specially; that is, they found that none of them possessed jointly with any of the rest; but that they severally had distinct and separate possessions of the premises demanded.
The question is, whether the lessor of the plaintiff is entitled to judgment upon this verdict, against all, or any, of the defendants.
*280I cannot find any case in the books that gives a clear and direct…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Ivey v. CowartSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Cooper v. BlairOregon Supreme Court · 1886
- Rowland v. Ladiga's HeirsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
- Weakly v. RoyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
- Ching On v. AmanaHawaii Supreme Court · 1886
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.