Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1896

Burdin v. Ordway

Burdin v. Ordway
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Decided January 23, 1896 · Foster, Haskell, Peters, Strout, Whitehouse, Wiswell
88 Me. 375; 34 A. 175; 1896 Me. LEXIS 20

Burdin v. Ordway

Opinion of the Court

Haskell, J.

Assumpsit for rent. No express promise is shown, and the law does not imply one from the facts in the case. The defendant was tenant of the plaintiff’s father. He died, and the tenant denies the title of the plaintiff, who claims to hold as heir. As to him, the tenant has become a disseizor. There was no relation of landlord and tenant between them from which the law implies assumpsit for rent or use and occupation. Rogers v. Libbey, 35 Maine, 200; Howe v. Russell, 41 Maine, 446; Emery v. Emery, 87 Maine, 281. Title to land should not be tried in assumpsit.

Plaintiff nonsuit.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.