Amsden v. Steam Stone Cutter Co.

U.S. Circuit Court

Amsden v. Steam Stone Cutter Co.

20 F. 479, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2237

CourtUnited States Circuit Court

DecidedMay 29, 1884

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 20 F. 479 (Amsden v. Steam Stone Cutter Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Amsden v. Steam Stone Cutter Co., 20 F. 479, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2237 (uscirct 1884).

Pincite

Opinion

Wh ¡eler, J.

This case differs from that of George v. Steam Stone Cutter Co., ante, 478, in this: George E. Chase purchased the land of Joros, Lamson & Go., supposing the title to be good in fee, made better] aents upon it, and conveyed the property to this plaintiff, who knew of the attachment. The statute expressly covers this difference by pr< viding for a recovery by a defendant in ejectment for bolter-mentfc made by those under whom he claims, if they purchased the lands supposing the title to be good in fee and made the betterments. Eev. jaws Yt. § 1260. The increase in value in consequence of such jotterments is found to be §2,000. Final judgment for seizin and j ossession of the premises, with §30 damages, is now to be entered in the action o’f ejectment; and judgment for the plaintiff on the di elarations for betterments for §2,000, value of betterments.

Ex' ¡cution stayed according to section 1266, Eev. Laws Yt.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Wh ¡eler, J.

This case differs from that of George v. Steam Stone Cutter Co., ante, 478, in this: George E. Chase purchased the land of Joros, Lamson & Go., supposing the title to be good in fee, made better] aents upon it, and conveyed the property to this plaintiff, who knew of the attachment. The statute expressly covers this difference by pr< viding for a recovery by a defendant in ejectment for bolter-mentfc made by those under whom he claims, if they purchased the lands supposing the title to be good in fee and made the betterments. Eev. jaws Yt. § 1260. The increase in value in consequence of such jotterments is found to be §2,000. Final judgment for seizin and j ossession of the premises, with §30 damages, is now to be entered in the action o’f ejectment; and judgment for the plaintiff on the di elarations for betterments for §2,000, value of betterments.

Ex' ¡cution stayed according to section 1266, Eev. Laws Yt.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 F. 479, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amsden-v-steam-stone-cutter-co-uscirct-1884.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack