School District No. 109 v. Hefta
North Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Walsh County, non. W. J. Kneeshaw, J. Occupancy for any period confers a title sufficient against all except the state an-d those who have title by prescription, accession, transfer, will, or succession. Comp. Laws 1913, § 5469. Occupancy for the statutory time confers a title thereto, known as title by prescription, and is sufficiént as against all. Comp.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Walsh County, non. W. J. Kneeshaw, J. Occupancy for any period confers a title sufficient against all except the state an-d those who have title by prescription, accession, transfer, will, or succession. Comp. Laws 1913, § 5469. Occupancy for the statutory time confers a title thereto, known as title by prescription, and is sufficiént as against all. Comp. Laws 1913, § 5470. It has been frequently held by the Federal courts that the statute will not begin to run until the issuance of patent. Redfield v. Parks, 132 H. S. 239, 33 L. ed. 327, 10…
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
The plaintiff school district brings this action to quiet title to 2 acres of land in a comer of the N. E. J of section 36, township 156, range 52. The complaint simply avers that the plaintiff owns the 2 acres, and that the defendants claim some title or interest in it adverse to the plaintiff. Such a complaint is a mere challenge to the defendant to make a counter complaint and to set forth his claim or abandon it. The answer of Peter Ilefta is dated January 3, 1913, and it is the commencement of an action by Peter Hefta to establish his title to the land in question. By its reply the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Hellerud v. HauckIdaho Supreme Court · 1932
- Steinwand v. BrownNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1917
- Cook v. ClarkNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
- State v. Towner CountyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1938
- Cook v. ClarkNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.