Mosher v. Yost
New York Supreme Court
THIS action was commenced for .the recovery of the possession of certain premises situated in Oppenheim, Fulton county, and damages for withholding the same from the plaintiffs. The answer contained a general denial, and it also denied the wrongful withholding by the defendants.
Read the full summary
THIS action was commenced for .the recovery of the possession of certain premises situated in Oppenheim, Fulton county, and damages for withholding the same from the plaintiffs. The answer contained a general denial, and it also denied the wrongful withholding by the defendants. The action was referred to a referee, and on the hearing before him, the plaintiffs gave in evidence a lease from Gioldsbrow Banyar, and divers assignments thereof, vesting the title in J ames Mautany, who died October 2d, 1857, in the possession of the premises, leaving his wife Lois Mautany him surviving, and…
1Opinion of the CourtRosekrans, J.
We need not discuss the question whether the instrument signed by Lois Mautany, in form, passed to the plaintiff the title to the land and lease under which the farm was held, the possession of which is the subject of this action. Conceding that it did, the deed of Mrs. Mautany was . clearly void upon the ground that the premises in question were, at the date of that deed, in the actual possession of *279the defendants claiming title under an assignment of the lease from William Mautany; The estate of the original lessees was a freehold estate, it being for their lives. (1 R. S. 722, marg. § 5.)…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Livingston v. Peru Iron Co.Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1832
- Clarke v. HughesNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Roseboom v. VechtenNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Vrooman v. ShepherdNew York Supreme Court · 1852
3Cited by2 opinions
- Crooked Lake Navigation Co. v. Keuka Navigation Co.New York Supreme Court · 1885
- Reformed Church of Gallupville v. SchoolcraftNew York Supreme Court · 1871