Bennett v. Horr
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Saginaw. Ejectment by Horr against Bennett for part of a tract granted by the United States to James Biley, in 1819, but not traced from Mm to either party, The case involves the same title that was disputed in Gamble v. Horr JO Mich. 561, where the substantial facts were that Horr, being the assignee of a mortgage given by Gamble upon the premises in suit, foreclosed it and became their owner when the period of redemption expired, and then sought to eject the heirs…
Read the full summary
Error to Saginaw. Ejectment by Horr against Bennett for part of a tract granted by the United States to James Biley, in 1819, but not traced from Mm to either party, The case involves the same title that was disputed in Gamble v. Horr JO Mich. 561, where the substantial facts were that Horr, being the assignee of a mortgage given by Gamble upon the premises in suit, foreclosed it and became their owner when the period of redemption expired, and then sought to eject the heirs of the mortgager who remained in possession. They defended on the ground that they had previously suffered judgment in…
1DissentCampbell, J.
I think the court below erred in holding that the presumption of the title arising from a conveyance by a grantor in possession can avail to overcome proof of paper title in some one else. Every plaintiff in ejectment must recover on his own title, and it is a complete defence to show title in a third person. I do not think that when title is once shown by a regular conveyance derived *225from government to have vested in any one, the law can ever raise a presumption that he has parted with that title, until there is proof of some direct action by him inconsistent with title, or else such a long…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lull v. DavisMichigan Supreme Court · 1848