Farr v. Swan
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of the city and county of Philadelphia. Feb. 27, March 2, 3, 4. — This was an ejectment for two lots in the square at the corner of Vine and Schuylkill Front street, included in plan C, between double lines. On the trial, before Pettit, president judge, the plaintiff claimed under a deed from the Penitentiary Commissioners, in 1830, under the act of 1821, March 20th.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of the city and county of Philadelphia. Feb. 27, March 2, 3, 4. — This was an ejectment for two lots in the square at the corner of Vine and Schuylkill Front street, included in plan C, between double lines. On the trial, before Pettit, president judge, the plaintiff claimed under a deed from the Penitentiary Commissioners, in 1830, under the act of 1821, March 20th. Then, as proof the lots were vacant, he showed a warrant and survey to Emlen, in right of Kellenbec.k, in 1768, 1770, for the lot between the lots in question, extending from Second to Front streets,…
1Opinion of the CourtSergeant, J.
— In the general principles of law contained in the charge of the court, we perceive no error, but in their application to the present case, we think a distinction must be made as to the quantity of ground claimed, to which the defendant sets up a title interfering with the plaintiff’s purchases, which would seem to be two lots of about twenty feet each. So far as the defendant was entitled as holding under one of the first purchasers of a city lot appurtenant to his one thousand acres, we do not perceive that it was indispensably necessary that he should have procured a warrant and survey…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Adle v. SherwoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
- De France v. StrickerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
3Cited by2 opinions
- Jackson v. LambertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Weidner v. LeTort Regional Authority, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Cumberland County1983