United States v. Crosby
The United States v. Jonah Crosby
Headnotes
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion
THIS case is fully stated in the following opinión,of this Court, which was delivered by Story, Justice, on the 24th of February, judges being present. all ■ . the A writ of intrusion ivas brought by the United. States against the Defendant in error to recover pos'sesbion of an undivided part of certain land lying, within' the district of Maine. Upon the trial of the cause in the district Court of that district, a special verdict was found by the jury, upon which the same Court gave judgment in favor of the Defendant in error. This judgment wps afterwards affirmed in the Circuit Court of Massachusetts, and is now before the Supreme Court for a final decision.
By the special verdict it appears that the claim of the United States tó the. land in controversy is under on* *116 Nathaniel Dowse, who derived his title, if any, from an instrument stated at large'in the same verdict, and executed in His favor by one John Nelson. The instrnment is 'without a seal and was executed at the Island of Grenada» in the West Indies, before a notary public, according to the mode prescribed, by the existing laws, to pass real estate in that colony — and both parties were, at that time residents therein.
By the laws of Massachusetts, no estate of freehold in land can be conveyed unless by a deed or conveyance under the hand and seal of the party — nod to perfect the title as against strangers, it is further requisite that the deed should be acknowledged before a proper magistrate, and recorded in the registry of deeds for the county where the land lies.
The question presented for consideration, is whether the lex loci contractus or the lex led. rei sitae is to govern in the disposal of real estates.
'The; Court entertain no doubt on the subject; and are clearly of opinion that the title to land can be acquired and lost only in the manner prescribed by the law of the place where such land is situate. The judgment of the Circuit Court must, therefore, he affirmed,.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 70 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Supreme Court16
- U.S. Courts of Appeals10
- Federal District Courts4
- Federal Specialty Courts2
- Historical Federal Courts4
- State Highest Courts25
- State Appellate Courts2
- State Trial Courts6
- State Specialty Courts1
Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
- Upper Skagit Tribe v. Lundgren
- Bradley Drenttel Mary Drenttel, Formerly Doing Business as the Frame Merchant, Debtor. Bradley Drenttel, Mary Drenttel v. Mary Jo A. Jensen-Carter
- Drenttel v. Jensen-Carter (In re Drenttel)
- Keesecker v. Bird
- S.M.Z. Corp. v. Director, Division of Taxation
- In re the Tax Appeal of Grayco Land Escrow, Ltd.
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.