Hall v. Ballentine

7 Johns. 536
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 15, 1811·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The statute gives the double rent for xvilfully holding over after the expiration . of the term, and the notice to quit; and here the holding over ,must be considered as wilful. There could be no mistake or pretence of right, nor was any advanced. In Wright v. Smith, (5 Esp. N. P. 203.) there was a boná fide holding over, under a claim of title. Here the act of the tenant [537]*537was palpably wilful, and the plaintiff is consequently entitled to judgment.

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

Hall v. Ballentine, 7 Johns. 536 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1811).

7 Johns. 536 (Hall v. Ballentine) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Van Antwerp v. Newman
2 Cow. 543 (New York Supreme Court, 1824)