University of Vermont & State Agricultural College v. Ward, 158 A. 778 (1932)

Citation: University of Vermont & State Agricultural College v. Ward, 158 A. 778 (1932)
Parent Document: University of Vermont & State Agricultural College v. Ward, 158 A. 778 (1932)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 1932-02-04
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4215928/university-of-vermont-state-agr... ↗

Full Text

747 chars

Since there can be no reversion here, there can be no right of action for an injury to it. The remedy of the plaintiff is by reentry for breach of condition, or by an action for breach of covenant against the person bound thereby. The defendant who has purchased and cut the timber has obtained title to it, unaffected by the'fact that the person from whom he bought was under a contractual obligation not to cut or permit the cutting. The principle is the same as where a lessee for years sells the crops to a third person, in violation of a provision in the lease that he shall not dispose of them. If no lien has been reserved, the- remedy of the lessor is against the lessee upon the agreement, and not against the purchaser. O’Brien v. Waite,

Other Sections in This Document (211)

Full Text