Jackson ex dem. Locksell v. Wheeler
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of ejectment, for lot no. 79. m / ’ Aurelius. The several demises were laid on the 1st of •r_- . _ - ~ January, 1805. lhe cause was tried at the Cayuga circuit, in June, 1809, before Mr. Justice Van Ness.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment, for lot no. 79. m / ’ Aurelius. The several demises were laid on the 1st of •r_- . _ - ~ January, 1805. lhe cause was tried at the Cayuga circuit, in June, 1809, before Mr. Justice Van Ness. The plaintiff, after proving the defendant in possession, Vyave jn evidence a deed from Nathan Wheeler to Weston ° Allen, for 200 acres of the north part of the lot, dated the 5th of April, 1803. About 12 years ago, Nathan Wheeler told one -Darius Smith, that he (Wheeler) was owner °-' the lot, and that Smith might go on it, keep Possessi°n I°r Wheeler, and improve it,…
1Per curiam
We cannot distinguish this case from that of Jackson, ex dem. Livingston, v. Bryan. (1 Johns. Rep. 322.) The disclaimer of the present defendant dispensed with the necessity of notice to quit, but it was after the date of the demise. At the date of the- demise, the tenant in possession was not a trespasser, for there was then no determination of the estate, by notice to quit, or otherwise. His sale in fee to the defendant was subsequent. We are of opinion, therefore, that the plaintiff was properly nonsuited, for want of showing a complete right to the possession prior to the day of the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Bowman v. WathenDistrict Court, D. Indiana · 1841
- McCarthy v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Tobin v. YoungIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
- Jackson ex rel. Walsh v. ColdenNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- Smith v. ShawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.