Thayer v. Smith
This text of 17 Mass. 429 (Thayer v. Smith) 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.
Opinion
A bare entry, although in the presence of witnesses, is not sufficient for the purpose of foreclosing an equity of redemption. The entry must be open, and peaceable, and actual posses[349]*349sion must be taken. The object intended by the law is, that the mortgagor may know when the three years commence, beyond which his right to redeem will cease.
The memorandum placed upon the record can make no difference. As it is not required by law to be recorded, the mortgagor had no reason to inquire at the registry for it. Nothing short of actual notice to the mortgagor will supply the want of a continued possession. The demandants having shown no legal right to the demanded premises, the tenant is entitled to
Judgment on the verdict.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
17 Mass. 429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thayer-v-smith-mass-1821.