Bethel v. Lloyd
| Decision Date | 01 April 1759 |
| Citation | 1 L.Ed. 11,1 Dall. 2,1 U.S. 2 |
| Parties | Bethel v. Lloyd and Others. No.____ |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Partition. Plea nontenet insimul, & c. Defendants permitted to give in Evidence to the Jury, that some of them were not Tenants of the Freehold* but only Tenants at Will.
* Cro. El. 759. Litt. Rep.
To continue reading
Request your trial
4 cases
-
Doe, Ex Demise of William Patterson, Plaintiff In Error v. Elisha Winn and Others, Defendants In Error
...5 Coke. 1 Saunders, 189, in notes. 1 Hardres, 119. Roberts vs. Arthur, 2 Salk. 497. Hoe vs. Northrop, 1 Lord Raym. 154. 3 Salk. 154. 1 Dall. 2, 64. 2 Wash. Virg. Rep. 280, 281. 2 Mass. Rep. 358. 12 Vin. Ab. tit. Evidence, Constat [A. b. 125]. 12 Vin. Ab. tit. Evidence, Exemplification, 114 ......
- Howard v. Russell
-
Lyle v. Richards
...against the tenant of the freehold. F. N. B. 148. It is clear law, that partition will only lie against the tenant of the freehold. Bethel v. Lloyd, 1 Dall. 2; and 1 Binn. 1; Rep. 300. It was doubted, whether it could be supported by tenant by the curtesy. Walker v. Dilworth, 2 Dall. 257. B......
- American Life Ins. & Trust Co. v. Rosenagle