Lessee of Sturgeon v. Waugh
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Ejeoment for 214 acres of land in Lower Paxtang township. The quantity in dispute was 46 acres only. It appeared in evidence, that Samuel Sturgeon, the father of the lessor of the plaintiff) in August 1742, brought an improvement from James'Mitcheltree for 5Z. He afterwards agreed, that his brother Jeremiah Sturgeon, under whom the defendant held, should have one moiety of the land, and he paid his proportion of the purchase.
Read the full summary
Ejeoment for 214 acres of land in Lower Paxtang township. The quantity in dispute was 46 acres only. It appeared in evidence, that Samuel Sturgeon, the father of the lessor of the plaintiff) in August 1742, brought an improvement from James'Mitcheltree for 5Z. He afterwards agreed, that his brother Jeremiah Sturgeon, under whom the defendant held, should have one moiety of the land, and he paid his proportion of the purchase. Both settled on the tract, and further improved and cultivated the same, Samuel holding the east, and Jeremiah the west end thereof. A partition fence run between them,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court.
In England, heresay and reputation are evidenr' of boundary from the necessity of the case, (2 Term Rep. 55.1 Ld. Ray. 311) where there is no ancient terrier or map. Such evidence has also been received in Pennsylvania, though the same necessity does not subsist here in ordinary cases. But expa/rie depositions cannot be read in evidence to establish an independent title, as that one claimed under an improvement. They may also be received by way of corroboration of other testimony which has been given in the cause. Restricted and used for those purposes the two depositions may be…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Pfoutz v. SteelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- Van Deusen v. TurnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1832