Littlefield v. Crocker
30 Me. 192
Opinion
— The defendant’s title is only under the mortgage deed given to the bank, in which the demand-ant did not join.
Afterwards, her husband conveyed the equity to another person, and in this conveyance she released her right of dower. But to this conveyance the tenant is not a party or privy. Estoppels are mutual. In this case it would not be so. The defence fails. Judgment for demandant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Littlefield v. Crocker, 30 Me. 192 (Me. 1849).
30 Me. 192 (Littlefield v. Crocker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
McCrillis v. Thomas
85 S.W. 673 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1905)
Boorum v. Tucker
51 N.J. Eq. 135 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1893)
Wilkinson v. Paddock
3 Silv. Ct. App. 411 (New York Court of Appeals, 1891)
Wilkinson v. Paddock
11 N.Y.S. 442 (New York Supreme Court, 1890)
Hinchliffe v. . Shea
8 N.E. 477 (New York Court of Appeals, 1886)
Nickell v. Tomlinson
27 W. Va. 697 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1886)