Britt v. Harper
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Cross-appeals from Union Chancery Court; James M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. Appellees were not entitled to a perpetual injunction; “they had no title to the land and had not been in possession long enough to claim by adverse possession. 22 Cyc. 750; 15 Cal. 496. 2. Appellant having a lien for taxes was entitled to possession.
Read the full summary
Cross-appeals from Union Chancery Court; James M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. Appellees were not entitled to a perpetual injunction; “they had no title to the land and had not been in possession long enough to claim by adverse possession. 22 Cyc. 750; 15 Cal. 496. 2. Appellant having a lien for taxes was entitled to possession. Kirby’s Digest, § 2759; 84 Ark. 587; 1 Story, Eq. 483; Whittaker'on Liens, 68; 30 Ark. 122. 3. Appellees attempting to base their title and right of recovery upon adverse possession was not entitled to affirmative relief of any kind. 129 Ark. 390. , 4. Appellees are…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
One John Daniels purchased three forty-acre tracts of land, in 1902 from one J. J. Cottrell, and about this time Daniels executed a deed of trust on the land to a Doctor Harper, for $320, to secure the payment of a note for that amount, and it is said that this loan represented the purchase money of the land. Daniels went into possession of the land, and improved a. portion of it, but failed to discharge the deed of trust. Prior to his death, Doctor Harper assigned the note and deed of trust to his wife, and, in 1908, the debt remaining unpaid, Mrs. Harper took from Daniels a deed to the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hilliard v. BunkerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1900
- Berger v. LutterlohSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1901
- Richards v. HowellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
3Cited by3 opinions
- McAllister v. Wright, TrusteeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939
- Brown v. WallSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
- Coffin v. MaitlandNebraska Supreme Court · 1945