Wilson v. Black

104 Mass. 406
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1870
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 104 Mass. 406 (Wilson v. Black) 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
Wilson v. Black, 104 Mass. 406 (Mass. 1870).

Opinion

Wells, J

His grantor having possession, the demandant took sufficient title, under bis deed, to enable him to maintain a writ of entry. But the tenant held a prior title by an absolute deed. The unsealed written agreement to reconvey did not constitute a defeasance at law. Performance of the condition of that agreement would not operate to revest the legal title in the grantor. It requires a reconveyance, and that can be enforced only in equity. Until the legal title is restored to the grantor or his assigns, the deed to the tenant gives him the better title, which must prevail at law. Cranston v. Crane, 97 Mass. 459. Exceptions overruled.

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

Related

Carlisle v. Libby
70 N.E. 423 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
104 Mass. 406, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-black-mass-1870.