Santee v. Keister
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. jG' Jlj RROR to the Common Pleas of Luzerne county, v This was a summons in ejectment to August 1812, in which, the right of possession or title of Keister, the plaintiff , , u } . 71 below, was asserted to w a tract of land situate m the town- “ sRip of Nescopeck, in the county of Luzerne, containing “ 150 acres or thereabouts, bounded on the west by the" “ Susquehanna river, on the south by lands now claimed by “ Conrad Lines, on the east by land surveyed in the…
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. jG' Jlj RROR to the Common Pleas of Luzerne county, v This was a summons in ejectment to August 1812, in which, the right of possession or title of Keister, the plaintiff , , u } . 71 below, was asserted to w a tract of land situate m the town- “ sRip of Nescopeck, in the county of Luzerne, containing “ 150 acres or thereabouts, bounded on the west by the" “ Susquehanna river, on the south by lands now claimed by “ Conrad Lines, on the east by land surveyed in the name of “ Priscilla Lee, and on the north by land surveyed in thé “name of Stephen Beech, Jr.” In November 1812 Santee…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
after stating the case and the several . exceptions, delivered his opinion upon them as follows:
1., The act of assembly requires that the plaintiff should file a description of the land, and the defendant might have insisted on it, by application to the Court of Common Pleas, if he had thought proper. But he chose to enter a rule of *38reference. The description was intended for the benefit of the defendant, that he might know with certainty what land was in dispute. Every man may waive a right which the law gives him. The defendant therefore might dispense with the desci'iption of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hagey v. DetweilerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1860
- Miller v. BealerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
- Lentz v. StrohSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1820
- Green v. WatrousSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828