Marr v. Boothby

19 Me. 150
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedApril 15, 1841
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 19 Me. 150 (Marr v. Boothby) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Marr v. Boothby, 19 Me. 150 (Me. 1841).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Whitman C. J.

This being an action of trespass quare clausum, it was incumbent on the plaintiff to give some evidence of title. For this purpose he produced a deed of the [151]*151premises, purporting to have been made by an administratrix, pursuant to a license for that purpose. But at the time of making it more than one year had elapsed since the license was granted. The deed therefore was inoperative. Macy v. Raymond, 9 Pick. 285.

The plaintiff then produced a deed of release and quit-claim from a person, who seems to have claimed to have purchased the premises, or locus in quo, at a sale by a collector of taxes. Under such a deed the plaintiff should have given evidence of his possession at the time of the execution of it, either actual or constructive ; or that he had since entered and become possessed of the premises; neither of which appearing in the case a nonsuit was properly ordered, and must be confirmed, and judgment be entered accordingly.

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

Related

Sullivan v. Davis
29 Kan. 28 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1882)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 Me. 150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marr-v-boothby-me-1841.