Willard v. Strong
Supreme Court of Vermont
Ejectment, to recover the seizin and possession of two hundred acres of land in Hydepark, being the third division set to the right of William Reed. Plea, not guilty. Issue to the court. On the trial in the county court, it was admitted that the title of Reed to the land had come to Farmer, the plaintiff’s intestate, and that the defendant, Eleazer Strong was in possession under Amos Srong, the other defendant, at the time of the commencement of this suit.
Read the full summary
Ejectment, to recover the seizin and possession of two hundred acres of land in Hydepark, being the third division set to the right of William Reed. Plea, not guilty. Issue to the court. On the trial in the county court, it was admitted that the title of Reed to the land had come to Farmer, the plaintiff’s intestate, and that the defendant, Eleazer Strong was in possession under Amos Srong, the other defendant, at the time of the commencement of this suit. The defendants gave in evidence a deed from Farmer to Fanny Phillips, wife of George Phillips, dated March 7, 1822, conveying seventy-five…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Williams, Ch. J.
But one question legitimately arises on the bill of exceptions in this case, although another has been argued. The defendants contend that they are entitled to hold the seventy-five acres deeded to Fanny Phillips by Farmer, and also seventy-five acres more, as deeded to him *534by the collector, Flanders, and requested the county court so to decide. This they now insist upon, and also, that ^iey were tenants in common with the plaintiff, and that no ouster was shown. It is vei-y clear that the request of the defendant could not have been…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Smith v. LewisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1866
- National Surety Co. v. WalkerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Sheafe v. WaitSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858