Thompson v. Woolf
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Washington County. The complaint alleges, in substance, that respondent is the owner of a certain tract of land, and “ by virtue of his title” is in possession thereof. That appellant has a sheriff’s deed to said lands, under a tax sale, and that such deed is void and constitutes a cloud on the respondent’s title.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Washington County. The complaint alleges, in substance, that respondent is the owner of a certain tract of land, and “ by virtue of his title” is in possession thereof. That appellant has a sheriff’s deed to said lands, under a tax sale, and that such deed is void and constitutes a cloud on the respondent’s title. To prove his title, the respondent offered what purported to be a deed from Green C. Caruthers and eighteen others in the state of Arkansas, dated August 8,1869, and purporting to convey to B. Goldsmith the interests of the said nineteen grantors in “all the estate, both…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Boise, J.:
It is claimed by the appellant that the respondent has not shown such a possession of the land as to entitle him to maintain this suit under section 500 of the code. The possession claimed by respondent is constructive and results from deraigning his title by mesne conveyances from the heirs-at-law of Einice Caruthers, deceased. If his title is perfect, we think he would be in constructive possession without making an actual entry, for the heir becomes seised and presented without entry. (1 Washburn on Real Property, p. 48, sec. 81; Brown v. Wood, 17 Mass. 68.) And a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Beebee v. . GriffingNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
3Cited by8 opinions
- O'Hara v. ParkerOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- Ohio Oil Co. v. Wyoming AgencyWyoming Supreme Court · 1947
- Young v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 1900
- Garvin v. Western Cooperage Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1919
- Woolsey v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.