New York Supreme Court, 1808

Jackson ex dem. Whitbeck v. Deyo

Jackson ex dem. Whitbeck v. Deyo
New York Supreme Court · Decided August 15, 1808
3 Johns. 422

Counsel

E. Williams, for the defendant., Van Beuren, contra,

Jackson ex dem. Whitbeck v. Deyo

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The defendant has only an equitable title which cannot prevail against the legal estate. And he cannot be entitled to a notice to quit, since the defendant claims to hold in fee ; and there is no tenancy whatever. It never has been decided, that a notice to quit was necessary, unless, where the relation of landlord and tenant existed. A mortgagor is quasi tenant at will. But here» there is no semblance of any such relation. We might as well require a previous notice to quit in every case.

Judgment for the plaintiff.

12Johns. 221.

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