Ralston v. Lush
This text of 181 A.D. 894 (Ralston v. Lush) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the final award of costs. The situation between the brothers made admissible declarations of Morris Jackson to the witness Lawrence. While incompetent to prove a grant, such declarations of a prior owner are received to explain seizin, or to qualify possession, especially as between persons in joint or contiguous occupancy. (Van Dyck v. Van Beuren, 1 Johns. 345; Jackson v. Bard, 4 id. 230; Pitts v. Wilder, 1 N. Y. 525, 527; Chadwick v. Fonner, 69 id. 404.) Therefore the exception to the court’s ruling at folio 88 of the record was well taken. Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Mills, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
181 A.D. 894, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ralston-v-lush-nyappdiv-1917.