Jackson ex dem. Rensselaer v. Whitlock
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of ejectment for lands lying in the county of Columbia, in which, by consent of parties, a verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the court on the whole of the evidence.
Read the full summary
This was an action of ejectment for lands lying in the county of Columbia, in which, by consent of parties, a verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the court on the whole of the evidence. The case briefly stated is, that a certain farm, of which the premises in question are parcel, was in the seisin and possession of oiie Richard Moore, upwards of 60 years before the trial; that he died seised and possessed, and on his death the farm descended to and vested in John Moore, his eldest son and heir at law,, who entered, &c. and was also seis.ed and possessed thereof,…
1Opinion of the CourtKent, J.
The material facts on which I found my opinion in this case, are the followihg:
• About the year 1750, Eytie Moore was in possession of the *259premises, and there arose a dispute respecting the same, between her and the ancestor of the lessor of the plaintiff. It was settled by reference, and Judge De Lancey was the referee. In .consequence of this reference, *Mrs. [*215] Moore surrendered the premises to the ancestor of the lessor of the plaintiff, and acknowledged him as her landlord.
This I do not regard as a fraudulent proceeding on her part, but as a prudent act, and for the best interest of her…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Forster v. FullerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
- May v. CalderMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1806
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mauro v. RitchieU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1827
- Tufts v. TuftsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1847