Waters's & Scott's Lessee v. Butler

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Waters's & Scott's Lessee v. Butler

29 F. Cas. 410, 4 D.C. 371, 4 Cranch 371

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedNovember 15, 1833

StatusPublished

This text of 29 F. Cas. 410 (Waters's & Scott's Lessee v. Butler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Waters's & Scott's Lessee v. Butler, 29 F. Cas. 410, 4 D.C. 371, 4 Cranch 371 (circtddc 1833).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court

(Morsell, J., doubting,)

refused to instruct the jury, that three months notice to quit was necessary; being of opinion that no notice was necessary, because the relation of landlord and tenant did not exist; and that if it did, the tenancy was only until a sale should become necessary ; and ended when the sale was made. The end of the tenancy was certain, because it could be rendered certain.

Verdict for the plaintiff.

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

The Court

(Morsell, J., doubting,)

refused to instruct the jury, that three months notice to quit was necessary; being of opinion that no notice was necessary, because the relation of landlord and tenant did not exist; and that if it did, the tenancy was only until a sale should become necessary ; and ended when the sale was made. The end of the tenancy was certain, because it could be rendered certain.

Verdict for the plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 F. Cas. 410, 4 D.C. 371, 4 Cranch 371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waterss-scotts-lessee-v-butler-circtddc-1833.