Woodworth v. Campbell
New York Court of Chancery
This was a bill for partition ; and the only question which arose was, whether the interests of the parties were such that a partition could now be made. The whole premises were leased to different persons for ten years, reserving rent; and the complainant was the owner of an undivided share of the rent and reversion.
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor
decided, that as the parties had a present interest in the rents as tenants in common and were also the owners of the reversion in common, they had a present portable interest in the premises, which would authorize the court to decree a sale in the present suit; but as the lessees were not tenants in common with any of the owners of the rents, or of the reversion, their interests could not be sold; that the sale must be made subject to the rights of such Ies*519sees during the term for which the premises were leased; and that the lessees would thereby become the tenants to the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Willard v. WillardSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Gayle v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
- Cook v. WebbSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
- Turley v. TurleyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1921
- Peterman v. KingsleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.