Source: https://chestofbooks.com/real-estate/Real-Property-Interests-Law/Sec-53-Transfer-of-reversion-a-By-voluntary-act.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 00:26:28+00:00

Document:
Morrill, 126 Mass. 545, 30 Am. Rep. 695; Newell v. Bartlett, 114 N. Y. 399, 21 N. E. 990; Shindelbeck v. Moon, 32 Ohio St. 264, 30 Am. Rep. 584; Ward v. Hinkleman, 37 Wash. 375, 79 Pac. 956.
99. Tarry v. Ashton, 1 Q. B. Div. 314; De Tarr v. Ferd. Heim Brewing Co., 62 Kan. 188, 61 Pac.
689; Lee v. McLaughlin, 86 Me. 410, 26 L. R. A. 197, 30 Atl. 65; Beck v. Hanline, 122 Md. 68, 89 Atl. 377; Harris v. Cohen, 50 Mich. 324, 15 N. W. 493; Odell v. Solomon, 99 N. Y. 635, 1 N. E. 408; Marshall v. Heard, 59 Tex. 266. 1-3. Post chapter XVI (Rent).
4. See Whittemore v. Smith, 50 Conn. 376; Yule v. Fell, 123 Iowa 662, 99 N. W. 559; Blake v. Ash-brook, 91 111. App. 45; Biddle v. Hussman, 23 Mo. 597; Anderson v. Conner, 43 N. Y. Misc. 384, 87 N. Y. Supp. 449; McCardell v. Williams, 19 R. I. 701, 36 Atl. 719. So the assignee of the leasehold takes subject to a sublease of which he has notice. Teater v. King, 35 Wash. 138, 76 Pac. 688.
L. R. A. 700, 47 N. W. 83; Chester-man v. Gardner, 5 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 29, 9 Am. Dec. 265; Hot-tenstein v. Lerch, 104 Pa. St. 454; Simanek v. Nemetz, 120 Wis. 42, 97 N. W. 508.
6. Commercial Bank of Santa Ana v. Pritchard, 126 Cal. 600, 59 Pac. 130; Chapman v. Gray, 15 Mass. 439; Toupin v. Peabody, 162 Mass. 473, 39 N. E. 280; Bova v. Norigan, 28 R. I. 319, 125 Am. St. Rep. 741, 67 Atl. 326; Lucas v. Sunbury & E. R. Co., 32 Pa. St 458. See Johnson v. Stagg, 2 Johns. (N. Y.) 510.
7. Toupin v. Peabody, 162 Mass. 473, 39 N. E. 280; Hutchinson v. Bramhall, 42 N. J. Eq. 372, 7 Atl. 873 (semble). But it has been held that the assignee of the leasehold is not affected by parol lease or license by the lessee as to part of the premises in favor of the lessor of which he had no notice. Burr v. Spencer, 26 Conn. 159, 68 Am. Dec. 379.
England, in order that the relation of landlord and tenant might arise between the transferee of the reversion and the tenant of the land, that the tenant "attorn" to such transferee, that is, consent to the transfer, or, what is the same thing, consent to be the tenant of the transferee.12 This requirement was based upon the personal nature of the relation between the landlord and the tenant in early times, and was dispensed with by Statute 34 Ann. c. 16, Sec.Sec. 9, 10, which provided, however, that the tenant should not be prejudiced by payment of rent before notice given him of the transfer. In a number merit of such a consideration, might, it seems, in the absence of any recognition of the statute of Anne or any local re-enactment thereof, be regarded as taking effect by way of bargain and sale, for the purpose of dispensing with the necessity of an attornment.
8. Moodie v. Garnance, 3 Bulst. 153; West v. Lassels, Cro. Eliz. 851; Linton v. Hart, 25 Pa. St. 193, 64 Am. Dec. 691; Leiter v. Pike, 127 111. 287, 20 N. E. 23, aff'g 26 111. App. 530.
9. Moss v. Gallimore, 1 Doug. 279; Rogers v. Humphreys, 4 Adol. & E. 299, 313; Burden v. Thayer, 44 Mass. (3 Mete.) 76, 37 Am. Dec. 117.
Mass. 3 (Mete.) 76, 37 Am. Dec. 117; Mirick v. Hoppin, 118 Mass. 582; Kimball v. Pike, 18 N. H. 419; Kimball v. Lockwood, 6 R. I. 138; Burden v. Thayer, 44 Mass. (3 Mete.) 76, 37 Am. Dec. 117.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.