Tate v. Clement
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 57, July T., 1895, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Bedford Co., Nov. T., 1898, No. 221, on verdict for defendants. Ejectment for two sevenths of a tract of land in "West Providence township. Before Gobdon, P. J., of the 46th judicial district, specially presiding.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 57, July T., 1895, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Bedford Co., Nov. T., 1898, No. 221, on verdict for defendants. Ejectment for two sevenths of a tract of land in "West Providence township. Before Gobdon, P. J., of the 46th judicial district, specially presiding. At the trial it appeared that on February 27, 1846, Samuel Tate executed and delivered a deed conveying unto Martha L. Tate, the wife of his son David C., in fee simple, a tract of land containing about fifty acres, as stated in the deed, although the real quantity was about seventy-nine acres. Martha and her…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mitchell,
The learned judge below directed the verdict for the defendants, and there is no claim that there was any material question of fact in dispute which required submission to the jury. Both sides having agreed that the issue was one of law for the court, the only question before us is whether the court decided it rightly.
Of this we entertain no doubt. The plaintiffs’ own case showed that they had no title. They claimed under a deed from Samuel Tate, made in July, 1846, and this deed showed of itself that the grantor had at that time no estate in the land to convey.…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Porter v. HendersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1919
- State Board of Administration v. RoquemoreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Ontelaunee Orchards, Inc. v. RothermelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Smith v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Dickson v. WildmanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1910
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.