Abbot v. La Point
| Citation | 82 Vt. 246, 73 A. 166 |
| Case Date | May 31, 1909 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Vermont |
82 Vt. 246
ABBOT
v.
LA POINT.
Supreme Court of Vermont. Brattleboro.
May 31, 1909.
Exceptions from Windsor County Court; Geo. M. Powers, Judge.
Action in ejectment by Sherman F. Abbot against Ezra La Point. Plaintiff had judgment, and defendant brings exceptions. Exceptions overruled, and judgment affirmed.
Argued before ROWELL, C. J., and MUNSON, WATSON, and HASELTON, JJ.
Stickney, Sargent & Skeels, for plaintiff.
Davis & Davis and S. E. Emery, for defendant.
MUNSON, J. August 4, 1903, J. E. Brown leased certain premises to H. E. Partridge for five years by an instrument duly executed and recorded. Partridge put in certain fixtures and occupied the premises as a meat market until December 18, 1905, when he sold his interest under the lease and gave possession of the premises, fixtures, and stock to J. P. Meany. Meany occupied until March 1, 1900, when he sold his Interest under the lease and gave possession of the premises and property therein to the plaintiff. Each of the above transactions was accompanied by the delivery of an unsigned incomplete carbon copy of the lease from Brown to Partridge. Each of the above assignees paid to Brown the rent accruing during his occupancy. The plaintiff occupied the property until September 21, 1900, when he "sold out" to Geo. H. Bennet, and put him in possession of the premises, fixtures, and stock. Some time in October plaintiff's father delivered to Bennet the carbon copy above mentioned, by what authority did not appear. November 16th plaintiff gave Bennet a bill of sale of the fixtures and stock with a schedule of items attached, and received from Bennet a chattel mortgage of the same to secure a part of the purchase price. Accompanying the bill of sale was a supplemental agreement which provided that Bennet, if he gave sufficient prior notice, might return any or all of said personal property, except the stock in trade and the cart, on the 1st day of April, and have the same credited on the chattel mortgage, and which authorized the plaintiff to sell or remove any or all of the same property previous to April 1st, on giving proper notice. There was no other writing between them.
April 1, 1907, pursuant to notice given March 11th, Bennet returned to the plaintiff certain of the property, including the fixtures, and under date of March 30th plaintiff discharged the chattel mortgage. March 14th Bennet sold some of the remaining property to the defendant, and executed and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wood v. City of Montpelier
...thereof. Harrington v. Gage, 6 Vt. 532; Elmore v. Marks, 39 Vt. 538; In re Lane's Estate, 79 Vt. 323, 328, 65 Atl. 102; Abbott v. Lapoint, 82 Vt. 246, 73 Atl. 166. But the acceptance of a deed by the grantee is an essential element of a good delivery. Denton v. Perry, 5 Vt. 382; King v. Smi......
-
BlOnl v. Haselton
...In the absence of a plain provision to this effect, the common law requires that notice shall be given. In re Allen, 82 Vt. 365, 372, 373, 73 A. 166, 26 L. R. A. (N. S.) 232. A parent has the right, at common law, to the custody, control, and services of Ms minor child. The right to the min......
-
Toussaint v. Stone, No. 1182
...it created a tenancy at will only under our statute, V.S. 1947, § 2649; Amsden v. Atwood, 68 Vt. 322, 332, 35 A. 311; Abbott v. Lapoint, 82 Vt. 246, 249, 73 A. A tenancy at will may, as the definition implies, be terminated at any time by either the landlord or tenant. 51 C.J.S., Landlord a......
-
Wood v. City of Montpelier
...thereof. Harrington v. Gage, 6 Vt. 532; Elmore v. Marks, 39 Vt. 538; In re Lane's Estate, 79 Vt. 323, 328, 65 Atl. 102; Abbott v. Lapoint, 82 Vt. 246, 73 Atl. 166. But the acceptance of a deed by the grantee is an essential element of a good delivery. Denton v. Perry, 5 Vt. 382; King v. Smi......
-
BlOnl v. Haselton
...In the absence of a plain provision to this effect, the common law requires that notice shall be given. In re Allen, 82 Vt. 365, 372, 373, 73 A. 166, 26 L. R. A. (N. S.) 232. A parent has the right, at common law, to the custody, control, and services of Ms minor child. The right to the min......
-
Toussaint v. Stone, No. 1182
...it created a tenancy at will only under our statute, V.S. 1947, § 2649; Amsden v. Atwood, 68 Vt. 322, 332, 35 A. 311; Abbott v. Lapoint, 82 Vt. 246, 249, 73 A. A tenancy at will may, as the definition implies, be terminated at any time by either the landlord or tenant. 51 C.J.S., Landlord a......