Jackson ex dem. Clark v. Babcock
This text of 17 Johns. 112 (Jackson ex dem. Clark v. Babcock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
It was decided in Wisner v. Wilcocks, (Col. Cases, 56.) that it was the privity of interest, and not the receiving of rents, which was the true test, as to the admission of a person to defend as landlord; and that a mortgagee out of possession might be let in to defend, in an action of ejectment brought to recover the premises. There is the same connection between the assignee of the mortgagee, and the tenant, as between the mortgagee himself and the tenant. We see no reason, therefore, why this motion ought not to be granted; so far, at least, as to let in Ballow, as landlord, to defend on the usual terms, on his stipulating to give no evidence of any title derived from his purchase of a prior judgment, but of the title only acquired under the mortgage.
Rule accordingly.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
17 Johns. 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-ex-dem-clark-v-babcock-nysupct-1819.