Dearborn v. Eastman
Superior Court of New Hampshire
This was an action of trespass, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close in Bartlett, in this county, it being the homestead of the late Nathan Dearborn, deceased, containing fifty acres, and taking down and car* rying away a barn on the 16th July, 1833. This action was commenced upon 18th February 1834, and was tried here upon the general issue, at November term, 1827, when it appeared in evidence, that one Nathan Dearborn, about the year 1790, entered into the land…
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close in Bartlett, in this county, it being the homestead of the late Nathan Dearborn, deceased, containing fifty acres, and taking down and car* rying away a barn on the 16th July, 1833. This action was commenced upon 18th February 1834, and was tried here upon the general issue, at November term, 1827, when it appeared in evidence, that one Nathan Dearborn, about the year 1790, entered into the land described in the plaintiff’s declaration, afterwards built the bam In question, and continued in possession of the same…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, C. J.
The question to be decided in this case, is, whether the plaintiff at the time the act of which she complains was done, had such a possession of the locus in quo, that she can maintain this action ? This depends entirely upon the effect and operation of her own deed. When she made that deed, and when the act of which she complains, was done, she was an infant, under the age of twenty one years ; and if, by reason of her infancy, she had a right to elect to consider her deed as void and wholly without effect, then she might lawfully consider Wooddis as a disseizor, and bring a writ of entry,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wendell v. BlanchardSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1822
3Cited by1 opinion
- Heath v. WestSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1852