Hill v. Roderick
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Fayette county. Jonathan Hill against John Roderick and others. This was an action of ejectment.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Fayette county. Jonathan Hill against John Roderick and others. This was an action of ejectment. Both parties claimed under John Tate, Sen., who, by his last will and testament, thus devised the land in dispute : “ I further will and devise that my son Robert Tate shall have that part of the plantation whereon I now live, to contain 170 acres, to live upon and make use of during his life, and at his decease to be equally divided amongst his children; and further, I will that my son John Tate shall have and fully'possess and enjoy the residue of the plantation I…
1Per curiam
— The declarations or admissions of Robert Tate, though made when he was seised for life, were not evidence against the defendants, who stand in no privity to him. His father devised the land to him expressly for life, and it is clear that the admissions of a tenant in possession are not competent to affect one who claims, not through him, but paramount to him. But for the reason that the rejection of the evidence was right, the direction in relation to one of the points was wrong. Robert had no power to bind any person but himself, and the agreement to establish a line betwixt him and John,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Fitzgerald v. BrennanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1889
- Hill v. RoderickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1847