Smith v. McEnany
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, for rent under a written lease of certain premises in Boston, for breach of a covenant therein to repair, and, upon an account annexed, for use and occupation and for the cost of certain repairs. Answer: 1. A general denial. 2. An eviction. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Bishop, J., the jury returned a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
This is an action upon a lease for rent, and for breach of a covenant to repair. There is also a count on an account annexed, for use and occupation, etc., but nothing turns on it. The defence is an eviction. The land is a lot in the city of Boston, the part concerned being covered by a shed which was used by the defendant to store wagons. The eviction relied on was the building of a permanent brick wall for a building on adjoining land belonging to the plaintiff’s husband, which encroáched nine inches by the plaintiff’s admission, or, as his witness testified from measurements, thirteen and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Royce v. GuggenheimMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Skally v. ShutsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
- Fillebrown v. HoarMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Sherman v. WilliamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- Colburn v. MorrillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Taylor v. FinniganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- Echo Consulting Services, Inc. v. North Conway BankSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
- Westland Housing Corp. v. ScottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
- A. W. Banister Co. v. P. J. W. Moodie Lumber Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Roth v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.