Fries v. Null
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 1, Oct. T., 1892, by defendants, Francis M. Null and Hester Null, from judgment of C. P. Westmoreland Co., Aug. T., 1886, No. 124, on verdict for plaintiff, Jesse Fries. Scire facias sur judgment in ejectment. The evidence on the trial, before Doty, P. J., was to the following effect: F. M. Null, Jr., one of defendants, became the owner in severalty, on March 28, 1871, of a tract of land in East Huntingdon township, Westmoreland county.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 1, Oct. T., 1892, by defendants, Francis M. Null and Hester Null, from judgment of C. P. Westmoreland Co., Aug. T., 1886, No. 124, on verdict for plaintiff, Jesse Fries. Scire facias sur judgment in ejectment. The evidence on the trial, before Doty, P. J., was to the following effect: F. M. Null, Jr., one of defendants, became the owner in severalty, on March 28, 1871, of a tract of land in East Huntingdon township, Westmoreland county. While still seized, on April 2,1875, he delivered a mortgage on eighty-one acres of this tract, reserving the coal and mining rights, to Hester…
1DissentJustice Mitchell
I am obliged to dissent most earnestly from this judgment which I regard as little less than revolutionary in its effect on title to land under the recording acts. By the act of 1775 grantees have six months in which to put their deeds on record, and the construction settled by the general understanding and practice for more than a century, has been that this privilege, thus expressly given, is a substantial one, that means what it explicitly says, and that can be lost only by the gran*582tee’s own neglect. It is only when by the delay of both parties, two deeds are both outside of the term, that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lightner v. MooneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Poth v. AnstattSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842
- Berg v. ShipleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857