Daniels v. Chicago & N. W. R. R.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Ajypeal from Lirni District Court. Action of right for the possession of lot 2, block 20, in Cedar Rapids. For answer, the defendant admits the plaintiff’s ownership of the lot in question, and alleges: 1. That the plaintiff’s cause of action is barred by the statute of limitations in consequence of the defendant’s possession for more than ten years under color and claim of title; 2. That plaintiff had dedicated a portion of the lot to the use of defendant; 3. That the…
Read the full summary
Ajypeal from Lirni District Court. Action of right for the possession of lot 2, block 20, in Cedar Rapids. For answer, the defendant admits the plaintiff’s ownership of the lot in question, and alleges: 1. That the plaintiff’s cause of action is barred by the statute of limitations in consequence of the defendant’s possession for more than ten years under color and claim of title; 2. That plaintiff had dedicated a portion of the lot to the use of defendant; 3. That the plaintiff’s only remedy is under the statute for the assessment of damages Jury trial. Yerdict and judgment for plaintiff.…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
I. As to the statute of limitations. At thé request of the defendant, the court instructed the jury as follows : “Defendant concedes that it has no prescriptive title under its first plea, and that plaintiff was the owner of the title, and hence the last two pleas of defendant raise the only issues to be tried.”
Although the defendant now insists that the evidence supports the plea of the statute of limitations, yet the giving of the above instruction relieves us from the necessity of considering any question arising thereunder.
l. highway: railroad right of way: II. As to the dedication. Upon…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Manderschid v. City of DubuqueSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
- Onstott v. MurraySupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
- Calking v. BaldwinNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Stacey v. Vermont Central RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
- Henry v. Dubuque & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Stodghill v. C., B. & Q. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1880
- New Orleans & Selma Railroad v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Daniels v. C., I & N. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1875
- Cairo & Fulton R. R. v. TurnerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1876
- Jacksonville, Tampa & Key West Railway Co. v. AdamsSupreme Court of Florida · 1891
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.