Staples v. Flint

28 Vt. 794
Supreme Court of Vermont·Decided April 15, 1856·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Redpield, Ch. J.

The defendant Flint and his associate Lamed leased to the plaintiff, by a writing, not acknowledged, the land on which to erect a bowling alley, as long as the building should be used for that purpose, upon certain conditions. After the alley was erected, they conveyed the land to a third party, representing to such party that the plaintiff had forfeited his lease by non-performance of certain conditions. It turned out, upon trial, that the plaintiff had not incurred such forfeiture. It is now urged that as the grantee of the land had notice of the plaintiff’s title, he is bound by it, and may be compelled to confirm it. This is probably so. But the conveyance did vest the whole title in the land, as against the defendant and Lamed, in the grantee; and we think the plaintiff is not bound to contest his claim in equity, with the grantee, which will only bring it around against the defendant in another form, if he prevails; but that he may go against the defendant, at law, upon his written contract.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Staples v. Flint, 28 Vt. 794 (Vt. 1856).

28 Vt. 794 (Staples v. Flint) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Grover v. Norton
113 Misc. 3 (New York Supreme Court, 1920)
Buswell v. Marshall
51 Vt. 87 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1878)
Wade v. Comstock
11 Ohio St. (N.S.) 71 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1860)