Jackson ex dem. Kemball v. Van Slyck
This text of 8 Johns. 487 (Jackson ex dem. Kemball v. Van Slyck) 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
Whether the lessor of the plaintiff purchased the premises, with the money of the defendant, and so-became seised for the defendant, in consequence of the resulting, trust, is not a material inquiry in this case. Admitting the fact, which was offered to be proved by parol, (and this admission is more than the proof warranted,) the plaintiff was entitled to recover, because a court of law can look only to the legal estate. An equitable interest cannot be set up in ejectment, as a -defence against the legal title. This is a well established principle. (Jackson, ex dem. Potter, v. Sisson, 2 Johns. Cas. 321. Jackson, ex dem. Smith, v. Pierce, 2 Johns. Rep. 231. and the authorities there referred to.)
Motion denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 Johns. 487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-ex-dem-kemball-v-van-slyck-nysupct-1811.