Owen v. Bartholomew
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a writ of entry, in which the demandant declared on his own seisin within thirty years and a disseisin by the tenant. The tenant pleaded a disclaimer as to part of the land, ai.u non disseisioit as to the residue. The demandant replied that the tenant did claim, &c. and did disseise, &c. The jury found a verdict for the tenant on both issues.
Read the full summary
This was a writ of entry, in which the demandant declared on his own seisin within thirty years and a disseisin by the tenant. The tenant pleaded a disclaimer as to part of the land, ai.u non disseisioit as to the residue. The demandant replied that the tenant did claim, &c. and did disseise, &c. The jury found a verdict for the tenant on both issues. The demandant claimed one undivided third part of a tract of land conveyed by Jonathan Allen, as agent of the Commonwealth, on September 16th, 1824, to John Ward, Eli Ensign and the demandant. The tenant claimed under a grant of the Commonwealth…
1Per curiam
It is manifest this case presents a question of boundary and not of title. There is no ground for claiming a title by adverse possession, for that cannot devest the title of the Commonwealth,1 and evidence of the holding, if admissible at all, must be received as showing the construction of the grant.
The question is, whether the grant to Austin and Shears included the whole or a part of the land in controversy, and if a part, what part. This was left to the jury, and the demandant moves to set aside the verdict, because evidence, which was objected to at the trial, was improperly admitted.
The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lush v. DruseNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Makepeace v. BancroftMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
- Rockwell v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Commonwealth v. MiltenbergerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838