Supreme Court of Vermont, 1876

Fuller v. Eddy

Supreme Court of Vermont · Decided August 15, 1876 · Royce

49 Vt. 11

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision. The 5 that cite it most often are listed here.

Canney v. Merchants Bank (In re Canney) (2d Cir. 2002)
Town of Bristol v. United States ex rel. Small Business Administration (District Court, D. Vermont 1970)
Kelly v. Clement National Bank (Vt. 1940)
Crahan v. Town of Chittenden (Vt. 1909)
Desany v. Thorp (Vt. 1897)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Royce, J.

The plaintiff claimed to recover upon the ground that the entry of the defendant upon the premises described in his declaration was unlawful. The defendant was mortgagee of the premises, and the plaintiff was in possession as mortgagor, or claiming under the mortgagor after condition broken. The right of the mortgagee to peaceably enter upon, and take possession of, the premises mortgaged, after condition broken, has long been recognized in this state. Wilson v. Hooper & Downer, 13 Vt. 653 ; Lynde v. Matthews, 19 Vt. 322. The court have found *13that the entry complained of was quiet, and not resisted, though not consented to by the plaintiff’s boy who was left in charge of the house at the time the entry was made. We think this was such an entry upon, and taking possession of, the mortgaged premises as the defendant might lawfully make. The entry was given by law, and was not made “ with strong hand, nor with multitude of people,” so it did not come within the statute which prohibits a forcible entry, and punishes persons who are found guilty of making one.

Judgment affirmed.

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