TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Bigelow v. Jones

Elisha Bigelow versus Thankful Jones, Administratrix of Farewell Jones

Bigelow v. Jones, 4 Mass. 512 (1808)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
September 15, 1808
Judges
Parsons
Citations
4 Mass. 512
Headnotes
The lands of a deceased testator being hable to be levied on, to satisfy the debts which he owed, the conveyance of those lands by the devisee does net defeat the lien of the creditor, but they may be taken from the purchaser; and the delivery of seisin by the sheriff is an eviction of the tenant, whose damages are to be measured by the value of the land at the time of the eviction, with the addition of interest
Summary
This was an action of covenant broken, founded on a deed of conveyance made by the defendant’s intestate to the plaintiff, bearing date March 24, 1802. The parties submitted the cause to the opinion of the Court, without argument, on a statement of facts, whereby it was agreed that the said intestate made the deed declared on, by which he conveyed the land therein described to the plaintiff in fee simple, with covenants that he was seised in fee of the premises; that they were free of all encumbrances [ *513 ] and that he would warrant * and defend the same to the plaintiff, and his heirs and assigns, forever, against the lawful claims and demands of all persons. The land formerly belonged to Moses Gill, Esq., who devised it to his nephew Moses Gill in fee simple, who conveyed it to the defendant’s intestate in fee. The same land was afterwards levied upon by Ward N. Boylston, under the judgment recited in the case of Wyman vs. Brigden, ante, 150. And the plaintiff, knowing that the said land was parcel of the estate of the said M. G. deceased, and believing that it was liable for the payment of his debts, did not resist the said levy, and the said W. N. B. has ever since had possession thereof. Upon these facts, it was agreed by the parties that if the Court should be of opinion that the plaintiff has a right to maintain this action, the defendant should confess judgment for such damages as the Court should think the plaintiff had sustained, with costs. But if the Court should be of a different opinion, the plaintiff should become nonsuit, and the defendant recover her costs.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Parsons

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Parsons, C. J.

The several questions arising on these facts have been already decided by the Court in the cases of Gore vs. Brazier, (ante vol. iii. 523,) and Wyman vs. Brigden, (ante, 150,) and the plaintiff must have judgment, unless we should overturn those decisions, which were made on covenants of warranty in the conveyances of lands executed by the same devisee, under the same will of the late Lieutenant-Governor Gill, and which had been broken by the eviction of the grantees, to satisfy the demands of the same judgment creditor.

We have decided that the lands of the testator are liable to be levied on, to satisfy the debts which he owed ; that the conveyance of these lands by the devisee did not defeat the lien of the creditor, to whom no loches were imputable ; that these lands might be levied on, and taken from the purchaser; and that the delivery of seisin by the sheriff to the creditor in satisfaction of his execution is an eviction of the tenant. These decisions necessarily resulted from the obvious construction of the statutes, making lands and tenements liable for the payment of debts.

*The damages in this case must be measured by the [*514] value of the land at the time of the eviction; to which interest may be added, until the time when the damages are assessed.

Let judgment be entered for the plaintiff.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1813–1814: 11839–1840: 11849–1850: 11857–1858: 11865–1866: 11905–1906: 118132026peak 1813 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Fowler v. Poling6 Barb. 165 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1849)
  2. Smith v. Sterritt24 Mo. 260 (1857)
  3. Tracy v. Strassel77 N.E. 700 (Mass. 1906)
  4. Ramsdell v. Creasey10 Mass. 170 (1813)
  5. Jones v. Buck54 Me. 301 (1866)
  6. Munroe v. Luke42 Mass. 459 (1840)

Most recent

  1. Tracy v. Strassel77 N.E. 700 (Mass. 1906)
  2. Jones v. Buck54 Me. 301 (1866)
  3. Smith v. Sterritt24 Mo. 260 (1857)
  4. Fowler v. Poling6 Barb. 165 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1849)
  5. Munroe v. Luke42 Mass. 459 (1840)
  6. Ramsdell v. Creasey10 Mass. 170 (1813)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list