Seavey v. Cloudman, 90 Me. 536 (1897)

Citation: Seavey v. Cloudman, 90 Me. 536 (1897)
Parent Document: Seavey v. Cloudman, 90 Me. 536 (1897)
Jurisdiction: Maine (state)
Effective Date: 1897-08-16
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5117322/seavey-v-cloudman/ ↗

Full Text

591 chars

The statutes in force when Esty v. Baker, supra, was decided provided that “a tenancy at will may be terminated by a written notice to quit, served on the tenant thirty days before the time named for its termination.” And the plaintiff’s argument is that the legislature, in 1863, intended to change this rule laid down in Esty v. Baker; and particularly it is urged that the use of the word “all” and the words “and not otherwise” are conclusive that no tenancy at will can be determined, or ended in any other *539way whatever, than by the statutory notice to quit or by “ mutual consent.”

Other Sections in This Document (14)

Full Text