Finlay v. Stevens
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtPage, J.
The writ of entry is peculiar in two respects. First, the remedy seems to be recognized little, if at all, outside Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine. Second, the remedy is essentially possessory and involves directly only the right of possession. Public Service Company v. Voudomas, 84 N. H. 387. By the very allegation of the writ, the defendant is in actual possession, and the immediate issue is whether the plaintiff has the right to possession. Only at times, and incidentally, are issues of title raised. There are cases in which title never comes in question. If A disseize B, and later…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Cartwright v. TruebloodTexas Supreme Court · 1897
- Klein v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1935
- Scheller v. GroesbeckTexas Commission of Appeals · 1921
- Malette v. WrightSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Wyman v. BrownSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1863
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Raber v. LohrSupreme Court of Colorado · 1967
- Page v. DownsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1973
- Branch Banking & Trust Co. of Virginia v. Jessee (In Re Creger)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Virginia · 2009
- Town of Newbury v. LandriganSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2013