Finnegan v. Carahar
New York Supreme Court
ffllHE action was ejectment, for a parcel of land situate in JL the county of Essex. On the trial, the title to the premises was shown to be in the plaintiff, and the defendant resisted a recovery solely on the ground that he was not in the actual possession at the time of the commencement of this action.
Read the full summary
ffllHE action was ejectment, for a parcel of land situate in JL the county of Essex. On the trial, the title to the premises was shown to be in the plaintiff, and the defendant resisted a recovery solely on the ground that he was not in the actual possession at the time of the commencement of this action. It appeared, from the evidence, that the defendant claimed title to the premises, and at the commencement of the action had a tenant in possession; but service of the summons and complaint was made on him under the following circumstances: The party who was deputed to serve the papers, took…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Bockes, J.
The action of ejectment, being a possessory action, should be brought against the party in actual occupation, and when brought against a tenant in possession, his landlord may, on due application, be joined with him, or be substituted in his place as #defendant, (2 R. S. 342, § 17.) Under section 118 of the Code as now amended, the landlord may be joined with his tenant as defendant in the first instance, (30 N. Y. 513.) So when the landlord defends in the name of his tenant *258unsuccessfully, he will be held liable for the costs of the action, (5 N. Y. 558.) It seems,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Town v. NeedhamNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Wood v. . SeelyNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Tilton v. NelsonNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Abeel v. . Van GelderNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- The Farmers' Loan and Trust Co. v. . KurschNew York Court of Appeals · 1851