Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
The land in dispute is a lot in the city of Boston. The lot was covered by a shed and was used by D to store wagons. The defense of eviction relied on that fact that a permanent brick wall was built on adjoining land belonging to P's husband. This wall encroached 9 inches by P's admission; 13.5 inches by a witness’s admission, and 24 inches by D's admission. The judge ruled that D had a right to treat the building of the wall as an eviction. P appealed to determine if an eviction only occurred if the wall made the premises uninhabitable for the purpose for which they were leased materially changing the character and beneficial enjoyment of the lease.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co