Case ID: johns_4/html/0186-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jackson, ex dem. Carr, against Green.
    ALBANY,
    February, 1809.
    Where a lease was assigned, and a bond executed at the same time, inhifih stated that the assigntotocmeYdeht Sgnec° and an agreement to reassign the lease and premises, on payment of the money with 'heM 6 to be'Via ftat^lm’morí gagor was ev.tito quit, before "bringing an ac-ton of ejectment against him.
    THIS was an action of ejectment for land, in the town of Berlin, in the county of Rensselaer. The cause was tried before Mr. justice Tates, at the Rensselaer circuit, in Octoher last.
    The plaintiff produced and proved a lease of the premWs from Stephen Van Rensselaer to jfosiah Godfrey, dated the 29th December, 1790, for the term of sixty years. An # 7 7 J J assignment was indorsed on the lease from Godfrey to In* „ , , . crease Green, dated the 6th April, 1805 : Another assignment was also indorsed, of the same date, from Increase Green, to the defendant; and an assignment, dated the 8th' April, 1805, from the defendant, of die lease, and all his interest in the premises, to Carr, the lessor. The defendant was proved tp be in possession qf the premises.
    
      A bond from the lessor of the plaintiff to the defendant, was proved and read in evidence, dated the 8th April, 1805, to which there was a condition, reciting the assignment of the lease from the defendant to the lessor, for securing the payment of 500 dollars, one-half on the 1st day of February following, and the other half on the 1st February, 1807, with interest, and that if the defendant should pay the money at the times specified, and the lessor should lawfully transfer the lease and premises back to the defendant, then the bond was to be void, &c. It was contended, that the assignment and bond was a conveyance, in the nature of a mortgage, and that the defendant was entitled to six months notice to quit, before bringing the action, and the defendant moved for a nonsuit. But, by direction of the judge, a verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the court, on the question whether the defendant was entitled to a notice to quit.
    
      Van Vechten, for the plaintiff.
    
      Foot contra.
   Per Curiam.

The assignment is, of itself, absolute, in form ; but from the bond which accompanies it, it appears to have been made, by way of mortgage, and can have no greater, or other effect than a mortgage. It is, therefore, within the case of Jackson, ex dem. Benton, v. Laughead, and the defendant is entitled to a notice to quit. The verdict must be set aside, and a nonsuit entered.

Judgment of nonsuit.