Document Type

Article

Comments

Equitable Ejectment, 26 Columbia Law Review 436 (1926)

Abstract

Since the New York Code of 1848 abolished the distinctions, between

actions at law and suits in equity and the forms of all such actions

and suits, the title of this paper may seem somewhat paradoxical.

Nevertheless, a few dicta to the contrary, one who sues for.the possession

of realty is still objectionable if he has only an "equitable" title,

because, it is said, so slight an interest will not support "ejectment."

In view of the courts' use of the words, we have ventured to combine

them here as a general description of the plight of the so-called equitable

owner as he sues for his land in so-called ejectment.

In some jurisdictions statutes expressly provide that he may sue.

Where this legislation is not in effect, most courts answer him as crisply

as did a New York judge thirty-five years ago: "The rule given by

Chitty prevails in this state. 'The lessor of the plaintiff must also have

a strict legal right; a mere equitable and beneficial interest, without the

legal title, will not suffice. The same statement was made by the

Court of Appeals so recently as last May in Trembarth v. Berner.

Date of Authorship for this Version

1926

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS