Brown v. Painter
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Des Moines District Gov/rt. Plaintiees claim the possession of lots no’s 2, 3, 4 and 5, in block 915, in Barrett’s subdivision of out lots in the City of Burlington, alleging that they are the owners thereof in fee simple, arid that defendant unlawfully keeps them out of possession.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Des Moines District Gov/rt. Plaintiees claim the possession of lots no’s 2, 3, 4 and 5, in block 915, in Barrett’s subdivision of out lots in the City of Burlington, alleging that they are the owners thereof in fee simple, arid that defendant unlawfully keeps them out of possession. The answer denies the allegation of the petition, and avers that defendant is the absolute owner of the real estate, and that she has been in the actual and adverse possession of the same for more than ten years prior to the commencement of the suit, and pleads the statute of limitations. The action…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
i catt,. uteoiiimital tion. — We deem it necessary to determine but one of the questions presented and argued by appellant’s counsel, From the statement of the case above made it appears that the defendant is the.original owner, and that, claiming to be such, she has been in the actual possession of the premises for ten years prior to the commencement of this suit.
This action was brought by the holder of the tax title after the lapse of five years from the recording of the tax deed. Section 790, Revision of 1860, provides “No action for the recovery of real property sold for the non payment…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Knox v. ClevelandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
- Jones v. CollinsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1863
3Cited by11 opinions
- Hintrager v. HennessySupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- Barrett v. LoveSupreme Court of Iowa · 1878
- Barrett v. HolmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Helscher v. GilbertSupreme Court of Iowa · 1954
- In Re Hoyt's EstateSupreme Court of Iowa · 1954
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.