Lufkin v. Curtis

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Lufkin v. Curtis

13 Mass. 223

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedMay 15, 1816

StatusPublished

Cited by21 cases

This text of 13 Mass. 223 (Lufkin v. Curtis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lufkin v. Curtis, 13 Mass. 223 (Mass. 1816).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

The mortgage deed relied on by the tenant is

wholly insufficient to bar the demandant of her claim of dower. It contains no release of her right, nor any declaration for what reason she executed it. To have been valid for the purpose contended for by the tenant, it should have contained words importing a release of «ier claim of dower; which has been recognized as sufficient.

Tenant defaulted.

[See Leavitt vs. Lamprey, 13 Pick 382.—Melvin vs The Proprietors of Locks and Canals, 16 Pick. 137. — Powell & ux. vs. Monson & Brimfield Manuf. Co. 3 Mason, R 347. —Ed.]

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

By the Court.

The mortgage deed relied on by the tenant is

wholly insufficient to bar the demandant of her claim of dower. It contains no release of her right, nor any declaration for what reason she executed it. To have been valid for the purpose contended for by the tenant, it should have contained words importing a release of «ier claim of dower; which has been recognized as sufficient.

Tenant defaulted.

[See Leavitt vs. Lamprey, 13 Pick 382.—Melvin vs The Proprietors of Locks and Canals, 16 Pick. 137. — Powell & ux. vs. Monson & Brimfield Manuf. Co. 3 Mason, R 347. —Ed.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Mass. 223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lufkin-v-curtis-mass-1816.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack