Towne v. Butterfield
This text of 97 Mass. 105 (Towne v. Butterfield) 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
The demandant having the actual possession of the demanded premises, under a deed of warranty, and claim of title, had an actual seisin, by right or by disseisin, sufficient to maintain his action, unless the defendant can show a better title. Jackson on Real Actions, 4. Stearns on Real Actions, 239. The tenant, being let into possession by the demandant under a contract to purchase, became thereby tenant at will to the demandant. Gould v. Thompson, 4 Met. 224. The question then arises, whether the tenant, being lessee at will of the demand-ant, can be permitted to assert a title inconsistent with that of her lessor at the time of making the lease, having never surrendered the possession, and no eviction by the owner of a paramount title, or anything equivalent to such eviction having occurred? And we are all of opinion that she cannot. Lessee of Galloway v. Ogle, 2 Binn. 468. Binney v. Chapman, 5 Pick. 124. George v. Putney, 4 Cush. 351. 1 Washb. Real Prop. 357-359, and cases there cited. Francis B. Smith, being disseised, could convey no title to a third person not in possession; and until entry by him, or demand upon the tenant, the tenant’s possession was that of her landlord.
Judgment for demandant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
97 Mass. 105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/towne-v-butterfield-mass-1867.