Murray v. Peters

The trial court proceeded upon a misconception of the nature of the action. The burden was upon the respondents to prove the efficacy of their title. (Best Renting Co. v. City of New York, 248 N. Y. 491, 496; Merritt v. Smith, 50 App. Div. 349; Dunkum v. Maceck Building Corp., 227 App. Div. 230, 238; affd., 256 N. Y. 275; Smith v. Dayton, 253 App. Div. 899; Queensboro Improvement Co. v. Dean, 263 App. Div. 956.) That issue, which was left open, should have been determined adversely to the respondents. The only colorable claim to title advanced was by the defendants Peters, pursuant to the Van…