Robb v. Bowen
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the Common Pleas of Lycoming. July 26. Ejectment. The plaintiffs were the former owners of an unseated tract of land, sold for taxes in 1886. Possession was not taken by the purchaser; and the question was, whether the plaintiff was barred by five years’ non-claim. Lewis, P. J., instructed the jury that the limitation in the act of 1804 did not extend to sales under the act of 1815.
1Opinion of the CourtCoulter, J.
In McCall v. Hornebaueh, this court decided that the limitation contained in the 3d section of the act of 1804, of five years, is not repealed by the act of 1815, but is in full force; and in Bayard v. Inglis, 5 W. & S. 465, it was ruled that a purchaser at a treasurer’s sale, who enters into actual possession of the land, and continues it for five years, making improvements, cannot be disturbed by the owner, after the lapse of five years. It is, therefore, fully settled by authority, that the 3d section of the act of 1804 is not repealed by the act of 1815. This of itself would be sufficient…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bayard v. InglisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ashley Co. v. BradfordSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1902
- Nind v. MyersNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1906
- Proctor v. Sagamore Big Game ClubDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1958