Hitchcock v. Carpenter
9 Johns. 344
Opinion
As the defendant claims under the heirs of Ferris, he is estopped from denying the seisin and death of Ferris, the former husband of the demandant. He has affirmed that seisin by taking under the heirs. This was so considered by this court, in the case of Hitchcock v. Harrington. (6 Johns. Rep. 290.)
The release offered in evidence by the defendant was properly . excluded. It ought to have been pleaded. It could not be given in evidence under any of the pleas on which issue was joined. It had no relation to either.
Motion denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hitchcock v. Carpenter, 9 Johns. 344 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1812).
9 Johns. 344 (Hitchcock v. Carpenter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Sayre v. Nichols
7 Cal. 535 (California Supreme Court, 1857)
Hicks v. Hinde
9 Barb. 528 (New York Supreme Court, 1850)
Norwood v. . Marrow
20 N.C. 578 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1838)
Moore v. Esty
5 N.H. 479 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1831)
Nason v. Allen
6 Me. 243 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1830)
Malone v. Hamilton
1 Minor 286 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1824)
Kimball v. Kimball
2 Me. 226 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1823)