Lessee of Nicholls v. Lafferty
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Ejectment for one messuage and 380 acres in Fayette township. The plaintiff claimed under a settlement right originally. It appeared that in 1774, the lessor of the plaintiff came upon the land, which was then unappropriated, and did work there. The next year he raised corn on five or six acres which he had cleared, and brought up his mother and sisters in the fall, and they lived together in a cabin on the land, very near the lands in question.
Read the full summary
Ejectment for one messuage and 380 acres in Fayette township. The plaintiff claimed under a settlement right originally. It appeared that in 1774, the lessor of the plaintiff came upon the land, which was then unappropriated, and did work there. The next year he raised corn on five or six acres which he had cleared, and brought up his mother and sisters in the fall, and they lived together in a cabin on the land, very near the lands in question. He constantly resided on the land since that time, except when the inhabitants were driven off by the Indians. There was a consentable line…
1Opinion of the Court
Sed per cur.
This point has been so often decided, and even in some cases apparently hard, that we cannot permit it at this time to be debated. The warrant holder has precluded himself from deriving his equitable title of improvement beyond the day called for in his warrant. The decision will conduce to good morals, and serve as an additional proof of the old adage, that honesty is the best policy, and we will not deviate from it.
*But has not enough been shewn, to evince that the ^ plaintiff has the earliest and best possessory right, and [*273 must necessarily recover ? He claims under a bona…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Graffius v. TottenhamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
- Clarke v. DouganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1849