Smith v. Benson
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was ejectment for lands in Highgate. The plaintiff’s title was derived by virtue of the levy of .an execution in his favor against Abijah Benson, on the interest of said Abijah, in the land in controversy, as tenant in common with the defendant.
Read the full summary
This was ejectment for lands in Highgate. The plaintiff’s title was derived by virtue of the levy of .an execution in his favor against Abijah Benson, on the interest of said Abijah, in the land in controversy, as tenant in common with the defendant. It was admitted that the defendant and said Abijah were tenants in common of a tract of land, of which this now in dispute was part, and that it was set off by plaintiff, on his execution, and described by metes and bounds. ' The question to be determined is the sufficiency of such a levy. It was admitted that defendant had always refused to…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Redfield, J.
This question has never been directly before this court for adjudication till now. In the case of Galusha v. Sinclear, 3 Vt. R. 394, an opinion is expressed, arguendo, that such a levy, as the present, would not be valid. This opinion of the late Chief justice has, to a considerable extent, gained the confidence of the profession,as being founded in sound reason.
When the levy of an execution or deed of conveyance is extended over the entire interest of the tenant, no question ever arises. Most of the conveyances by tenants in common, found…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Porter v. HillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
- Mitchell v. HazenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1823
- Starr v. LeavittSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1817
3Cited by12 opinions
- Stark v. BarrettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Campau v. GodfreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
- Mee v. BenedictMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Campau v. CampauMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
- Good v. CoombsTexas Supreme Court · 1866
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.