¶1The plaintiff’s brother had rented the premises of the defendant, and had surrendered them to him by express agreement, vacating them with his family and goods. The plaintiff, who had occupied by leave of her brother, was left behind when he abandoned the premises. She was thus occupying without right or authority. Whether to be deemed a trespasser or not, before demand was made that she should leave, she certainly became one when such demand was made and she refused compliance. She was entitled to no other notice to quit than one that should inform her that the person by whose authority she was originally there had surrendered possession, and that the defendant desired her to leave. Upon her refusal to comply with this request, he was justified in ejecting her, using no unreasonable force. Such was the ruling of the presiding justice, and it is fully supported by Low v. Elwell, 121 Mass. 309. Exceptions overruled.
133 Mass. 426
Stone v. Lahey
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided October 2, 1882
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1882-10-02
Tort for assault and battery. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Bacon, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows: The plaintiff was in the occupation of a tenement belonging to the defendant, which the plaintiff’s husband occupied under the plaintiff’s brother, who rented it from the defendant, and who had, up to a short time before the alleged assault, occupied it himself, together with the plaintiff and her family.
Relies on Low v. Elwell
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1882-10-02
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 1914
6 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →