Equitable Ejectment

Abstract

Since the New York Code of 1848 abolished the distinctions, between actions at law and suits in equity and the forms of all such actions and suits, the title of this paper may seem somewhat paradoxical. Nevertheless, a few dicta to the contrary, one who sues for.the possession of realty is still objectionable if he has only an "equitable" title, because, it is said, so slight an interest will not support "ejectment." In view of the courts' use of the words, we have ventured to combine them here as a general description of the plight of the so-called equitable owner as he sues for his land in so-called ejectment. In some jurisdictions statutes expressly provide that he may sue. Where this legislation is not in effect, most courts answer him as crisply as did a New York judge thirty-five years ago: "The rule given by Chitty prevails in this state. 'The lessor of the plaintiff must also have a strict legal right; a mere equitable and beneficial interest, without the legal title, will not suffice. The same statement was made by the Court of Appeals so recently as last May in Trembarth v. Berner.