Marr v. Hobson
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
This was a petition for partition, entered at the June Term of the District Court, 1840, against persons unknown. The respondents entered their appearance in that Court, after the Revised Statutes went into operation, and it was brought into this Court by demurrer. No question was raised, whether, as the law then was, an appeal would lie.
Read the full summary
This was a petition for partition, entered at the June Term of the District Court, 1840, against persons unknown. The respondents entered their appearance in that Court, after the Revised Statutes went into operation, and it was brought into this Court by demurrer. No question was raised, whether, as the law then was, an appeal would lie. The respondents claimed to be sole seized of the premises ; and the pleadings are referred to in the report but are not found in the copies. All the material portions of the title deeds under which the parties, respectively, claimed are found in the opinion…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was afterwards drawn up by
Tenney J.
— The petitioner claims to be seized of a moiety of the land described in the petition in common and undivided with persons unknown. The respondents come in and file their brief statement, alleging therein, that they are sole seized. The petitioner files a counter brief statement denying to the respondents any right t,o controvert or put in issue his seizin, because they have no estate or interest in the lands; and he relies upon c. 121, $ 11, 12 and 13, of the Revised Statutes.
The respondents insist that the Revised Statutes have…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Willard v. NasonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
3Cited by1 opinion
- Perry v. Inhabitants of Town of LincolnvilleSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1953