Wallace's Lessee v. Miner
Ohio Supreme Court
This case was adj'ourned' from the county of Ross. The plaintiff’s title, as offered in evidence on the trial, was as follows : 1. A patent to the heirs of Powell, by name, dated November 4, 1818, for survey, No. 503, for eight hundred and sixty-five acres. 2. Deeds from Powell’s heirs to the lessors of the plaintiff, covering the whole land included in the patent, and dated April 15, 1826, the other dated September 17, 1830. The defendant was admitted to be in the…
Read the full summary
This case was adj'ourned' from the county of Ross. The plaintiff’s title, as offered in evidence on the trial, was as follows : 1. A patent to the heirs of Powell, by name, dated November 4, 1818, for survey, No. 503, for eight hundred and sixty-five acres. 2. Deeds from Powell’s heirs to the lessors of the plaintiff, covering the whole land included in the patent, and dated April 15, 1826, the other dated September 17, 1830. The defendant was admitted to be in the possession of one hundi’ed acres at the lower end of the survey, to recover which the suit is brought. *The defense set up was as…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Wright
delivered the opinion of the court:
The legal title to the land in dispute was granted by the government in 1818, by the patent to Powell’s heirs. The deeds from them transfer it to the lessor of the plaintiff. Since the emanation of the patent, time has not elapsed to protect the defendant in his posessiou. Before 1818, the legal estate was in the government, and no adverse possession could protect persons so holding as to bar the government of its claims. Statutes of limitation, without express provisions, never run against the government.
*It is claimed that from the lapse of…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Dean Et v. HartOhio Court of Appeals · 1937