Eaton v. Tallmadge
Wisconsin Supreme Court
ERROR to the Circuit Court for Fond du Lao County. Ejectment, for two undivided halves of the south half of a certain lot four, in said county, brought by Eaton against Tallmadge and Pomeroy.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Circuit Court for Fond du Lao County. Ejectment, for two undivided halves of the south half of a certain lot four, in said county, brought by Eaton against Tallmadge and Pomeroy. Plaintiff’s evidence included the following deeds : 1. A tax deed of the whole land to one Loomis, dated April 24,1862, upon a sale for taxes of 1859. 2. A deed of the same from Loomis to one Knapp, June 24, 1862. 3. A deed of the same from plaintiff to Knapp, August 26, 1859; a mortgage back for the purchase-money, of the same date, with a record of the foreclosure of said mortgage (commenced December…
1Opinion of the CourtPaine, J.
The nonsuit as to the defendant TaTlmadge seems to have been properly granted. It.is true that, if it had appeared that no one was in the actual possession of the lands, an action might have been sustained against TaTlmadge, on his “claiming title,” as sworn to by the plaintiff. Sec. 3, chap. 141, R. S.; Knox v. Cleveland, 13 Wis. 250; Bangor v. Empie, 5 Hill, 48. But it had already appeared, from the plaintiff’s evidence, that Pomeroy was in the actual possession of the land. In such case, the action must be against him, and not against one merely claiming title and out of possession. Here…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Knox v. ClevelandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by14 opinions
- United State Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Beaty v. ClymerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903
- Berry v. SeawallCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895
- Jones v. BergWashington Supreme Court · 1919
- Peterson v. AnkromWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1884
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.