Kilpatrick v. Trotter
Supreme Court of Alabama
Ejectment by S. E. Trotter against T. J. Kilpatrick and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Plaintiff adduced title by deed from the Columbus Iron Works and from Smith Bros. & Co. to William and S. E. Trotter, of date February 6, 1900, and from William Trotter to S. E. Trotter, of date March 4, 1903,. describing the lot in controversy, which deeds are set out.
Read the full summary
Ejectment by S. E. Trotter against T. J. Kilpatrick and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Plaintiff adduced title by deed from the Columbus Iron Works and from Smith Bros. & Co. to William and S. E. Trotter, of date February 6, 1900, and from William Trotter to S. E. Trotter, of date March 4, 1903,. describing the lot in controversy, which deeds are set out. The defendants claim by deed from Crittenden and wife to D. B. Stough, executed February 4, 1887, by deed from Stough and wife to Young, executed September 28, 1904, by deed from Young and wife to defendant,…
1Opinion of the CourtAnderson, J.
The plaintiff showed the possession of his grantors to the lot of which the strip in question was part, and introduced the deeds from them getting their title into him, and it was undisputed that the said strip was a part of the lot as described in the said deeds. The plaintiff, therefore, made out a prima facie case, and showed a right to recover as against any one not showing a superior title. The defendants relied upon an actual adverse possession of the strip in question for a period of ten years, for the purpose of defeating the plaintiff’s right to recover.
The first actual possession…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Earnest v. FiteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Wright v. Louisville & N. R. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1919
- Jones v. WildSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914