Runyan v. Mersereau
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of trespass, quare clausum fregit, to which the defendant, besides the general issue, pleaded specially: 1. Freehold in the assignees of Joshua Mersereau, under the insolvent act of 1811, and license from them to cut timber. 2. Freehold in himself. 3. Freehold in Joshua Mersereau, and license from him to cut timber.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of trespass, quare clausum fregit, to which the defendant, besides the general issue, pleaded specially: 1. Freehold in the assignees of Joshua Mersereau, under the insolvent act of 1811, and license from them to cut timber. 2. Freehold in himself. 3. Freehold in Joshua Mersereau, and license from him to cut timber. To each of these pleas, the plaintiff replied, that the freehold was in himself, traversing that it was in the assignees, &c. and issues, were taken thereon. The plaintiff, at the trial, produced in evidence a deed from Joshua Mersereau to one Leonard, for the…
1Per curiam
This was an action of trespass, quare clausum, fregit. The plaintiff proved himself in possession of the locus in quo, and showed a title derived under a judgment against one James Leonard, who, it appeared, had mortgaged the land to Joshua Mersereau. By the pleadings, the question presented to the court is, whether the freehold was in the plaintiff, who had purchased the equity of redemption, under the judgment against the mortgagor, or in Joshua Mersereau, the mortgagee.
Courts of law, both here and in England, have gone very fax towards, if not the full length of, considering mortgages, at…
2Cited by47 opinions
- Kortright v. . CadyNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Pierce v. Boston Five Cents Savings BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Brinkman v. JonesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
- Wilson v. TroupCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1823
- Curtis v. . MooreNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.