Banton v. Crosby
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On report. Real action against Wilson Crosby and others, devisees of William C. Crosby, deceased, and Clara W. Gibson and others, devisees of Thomas N. Egery, deceased, to recover lot 29, Township 2, range 7, West from the East line of the State, Penobscot county, and containing 200 acres.
Read the full summary
On report. Real action against Wilson Crosby and others, devisees of William C. Crosby, deceased, and Clara W. Gibson and others, devisees of Thomas N. Egery, deceased, to recover lot 29, Township 2, range 7, West from the East line of the State, Penobscot county, and containing 200 acres. Plaintiffs’ predecessors in title bring themselves within the provisions of the resolve of March 5, 1801, and the State issued a certificate to the heirs of Jonathan Bartlett and afterwards a deed. Gary v. Whitney, 48 Maine, 527; Sargent v. Sampson, 8 Maine, 148; Mayo v. Libbey, 12 Mass. 339; St. Joseph 8¡-…
1Opinion of the CourtEmery, J.
The published opinion in Millett v. Mullen, ante, p. 400, governs this case to the extent of determining that the defendants have no title, and that the plaintiff’s predecessors in title, notwithstanding their delinquency in not paying state taxes, have had revived in them by the state an heritable and conveyable title good against strangers to the state’s title. The only remaining question is what of that original title the plaintiffs deraign from those predecessors. The demanded land is Lot No. twenty-nine in Township Two, Range Seven, W. E. L. S.
The plaintiff deraigns title from Jonathan…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Leavenworth, Lawrence, & Galveston Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Schulenberg v. HarrimanSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Mayo v. LibbyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815