Stone v. Lahey
Delia Stone v. Patrick Lahey
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Devens, J.
The plaintiff’s brother had rented the premises of the defendant, and had surrendered them to him by express agreement, vacating them with his family and goods. The plaintiff, who had occupied by leave of her brother, was left behind when he abandoned the premises. She was thus occupying without right or authority. Whether to be deemed a trespasser or not, before demand was made that she should leave, she certainly became one when such demand was made and she refused compliance. She was entitled to no other notice to quit than one that should inform her that the person by whose authority she was originally there had surrendered possession, and that the defendant desired her to leave. Upon her refusal to comply with this request, he was justified in ejecting her, using no unreasonable force. Such was the ruling of the presiding justice, and it is fully supported by Low v. Elwell, 121 Mass. 309 . Exceptions overruled.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.