Churchill v. Loring
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a writ of entry, in common form, making no allusion to a mortgage. The defendant filed a brief statement of facts, which he proposed to prove under the general issue of not guilty ; (see 55th Rule of Court;) and the parties agreed upon the following statement of facts : — That the land demanded was conveyed to the plaintiff, m November 1832, by a deed of mortgage, to secure the payment of $ 3000 and interest, for which sum a note was given signed by J. J. Loring, J.…
Read the full summary
This was a writ of entry, in common form, making no allusion to a mortgage. The defendant filed a brief statement of facts, which he proposed to prove under the general issue of not guilty ; (see 55th Rule of Court;) and the parties agreed upon the following statement of facts : — That the land demanded was conveyed to the plaintiff, m November 1832, by a deed of mortgage, to secure the payment of $ 3000 and interest, for which sum a note was given signed by J. J. Loring, J. F. Loring and W. L. Loring, the grantors in the deed, (who appear on record to be tenants m fee of the premises,) and…
1Opinion of the Court
Wilde J.
afterward drew up the opinion of the Court. At the trial of this case, on the general issue, the defendant offered to prove that he was not tenant of the freehold and had no estate in the demanded premises ; but that the title and possession were in third persons. The plaintiff objected to the admission of this evidence, but it was admitted by the presiding judge, and if the evidence offered amounted to a legal defence, it was clearly admissible by St. 1836, c. 273, § 1, in which it is enacted, that in every civil action “ all matters of law or of fact in defence of such action may be…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Keith v. SwanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814