Clouston v. Shearer
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Bill in equity to quiet the plaintiff’s title to land in Roxbury. The defendant demurred to the jurisdiction, and argued that the plaintiff’s remedy was plain, adequate and complete, under the Gen. Sts. c. 134, §§ 49, 50. The case was reserved by the chief justice, on the bill and the demurrer, for the determination of the full court, and is stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtChapman, C. J.
As the case comes before us on demurrer to the plaintiff’s bill, the allegations of the bill must be taken to be true. The object of the bill is, to remove a cloud from the plaintiff’s title to certain real estate. He derives his title from Charles Eedding, who conveyed to Peter Goodnow, by deed of warranty, August 13,1861, subject to a mortgage to Eliza D. Bryant, dated April 1, 1861. Peter Goodnow conveyed to the plaintiff June 16,1863. On the 1st of July 1861, the right of Charles Eedding was attached on mesne process by Bradford S. Farrington, deputy sheriff. Execution was issued in the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Carroll v. SaffordSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
3Cited by39 opinions
- Bevilacqua v. RodriguezMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2011
- White v. GoveMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- Chapman v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- McArthur v. Hood Rubber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
- Attorney General v. Tudor Ice Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.