Case ID: johns_10/html/0296-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jackson, ex dem. Bowne, against Hinman.
    ALBANY,
    August, 1813.
    in ejectment, iljo lessor claimed title by virtue of a sheriff’s sale, undev a judgment entered agáinst B., ’ title fromCd who claimed jjndsley pa-i!" puíchased from B. subsequent to the lien created Sen* ani'enpossession™dev that p™some years afPr'qu'itciat>k deed /or the premises under the Catskill patent, of j6G8, and set np that title as an older and better title.
    It was held that L. having purchased from B. and entered into possession under his title, was estopped from denying that title as against a plaintiff claiming under the same title. (
    THIS was an action of ejectment, tried before Mr. Justice ^ “ Thompson, at the Green circuit, in August, 1812. The plaintiff claimed title to a lot of land in the village of Catskill, which the defendant possessed, as tenant to John Livingston. The prer mises had been sold by the sheriff of Green, by virtue of an execution issued on a judgment in this court, entered up in 1792, in faY0Ur °f the lessor of the plaintiff against Benan Brockway, Durban Brockway, and Gideon Brockway, in which suit Gideon Brockway alone was arrested, for the sum of 2,796 dollars and 97 cents The lessor of the plaintiff was the purchaser, and the sheriff’s deed to him, for the consideration of five dollars, dated 21st December, 1809, was produced and read m evidence. The plaintiff also read in evidence a deed from Elisha Camp and his w"’fe) dated 10th May, 1790, for the consideration of two hundred and seventy-five pounds, to the Brockways above named, for one acre of land, of which the premises in question are part. The lot in question was in the possession of Gideon Brockway, in 1792, an¿ fell to him on a division between him and the other two. John Livingston, about the year 1800, purchased the lot of Gideon Brockway, and it has since been held by the tenants of Livingston. Elisha Camp claimed title to the lot under the Lindsley patent, granted the 22d August, 1738, and built a house on the lot in 1785.
    The defendant gave in evidence the Catskill patent, issued the 20th April, 1688, which included the premises in question. A map of that patent made in 1767 was produced. A regular partition of the patent among the several proprietors was admitted, and a regular deduction of title from the proprietors of lot No. 1. in the 7th di vision, down to Livingston, who purchased from them, for a valuable consideration, by a quitclaim deed, dated the 12th June, 1804.
    A verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the court; and it was agreed that if the court should be of opinion that the defendant was estopped from showing a title under the Catskill patent, judgment should be entered for the plaintiff; but if the defendant was not so estopped, then judgment should be entered for him.
    The case was submitted to the court without argument.
   Per Curiam.

The lessor of the plaintiff claims title to the premises, by virtue of a sale under a judgment against Gideon Brock.way, who derived his title from one camps who built a house on the premises as early as 1785, and claimed under the ■Lindsley patent. The defendant is a tenant of John Livingston, who purchased from Brockmay subsequent to the lien created by the judgment, and entered under that purchase; and some years afterwards, took a quitclaim deed under the Catskill patent; and now sets up the title under that patent as the elder and better title. But as Livingston came in under the title from Broclcway, he is estopped from denying that title as against a grantor under the same title. It cannot be a good title for him at one time, and not a good title at another. He cannot be permitted to gainsay that title as against a plaintiff who claims under the same title by a prior right. Brockway himself would not be permitted to deny his own title, to the destruction of the claim of his judgment creditor ; and Livingston, the purchaser under him, cannot be in a better condition.

3 udgment for the plaintiff.