Towne v. Butterfield

97 Mass. 105
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1867
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

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.

Bluebook
Towne v. Butterfield, 97 Mass. 105 (Mass. 1867).

Opinion

Hoar, J.

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

Foster v. Lee
171 N.E. 229 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1930)
Timber Co. v. . Yarbrough
102 S.E. 630 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1920)
Buckhorn Land & Timber Co. v. Yarbrough
179 N.C. 335 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1920)
Farnsworth v. . Boro Oil Gas Co.
109 N.E. 860 (New York Court of Appeals, 1915)
Brown v. Dickey
75 A. 382 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1909)
Illinois Steel Co. v. Budzisz
119 N.W. 935 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1909)
Hinckley v. Guyon
52 N.E. 523 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1899)
Austin v. Kimball
45 N.E. 627 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1897)
Frank v. Palmer
65 Ill. App. 124 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1896)
Church v. Wright
4 A.D. 312 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1896)
Crockett v. Althouse
35 Mo. App. 404 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1889)
Alderson v. Marshall
7 Mont. 288 (Montana Supreme Court, 1888)
O'Donnell v. McIntyre
44 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 623 (New York Supreme Court, 1885)
Lyon v. Cunningham
136 Mass. 532 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1884)
Whiting v. . Edmunds
94 N.Y. 309 (New York Court of Appeals, 1884)
Gage v. Campbell
131 Mass. 566 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1881)
Bonney v. Foss
62 Me. 248 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1873)
Dunham v. Townsend
110 Mass. 440 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1872)
Longfellow v. Longfellow
61 Me. 590 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1870)
Hawes v. Shaw
100 Mass. 187 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1868)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 Mass. 105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/towne-v-butterfield-mass-1867.