Scheetz v. Fitzwater
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the Common Pleas of Montgomery county. March 29, 30. This was an action of trespass by the plaintiff in error, in which the title to the locus in quo was the question.
Read the full summary
In error from the Common Pleas of Montgomery county. March 29, 30. This was an action of trespass by the plaintiff in error, in which the title to the locus in quo was the question. The plaintiff claimed title by a deed in 1746, from Bmlen to Lardner, conveying “ a certain mill-dam or pond,of water, and mill-race or stream of water, issuing and proceeding from the said mill-dam or pond of water, as the same is now situate, and being in and upon a certain tract or parcel of land situate in the manor of Springfield, together also with the site and soil of the said mill-pond or dam and race of…
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
There is only one assignment of error in this record, which is sustained; and the other points are left to stand on the reasons of the judge, which seem to be satisfactory. He erred, however, in charging that the adverse possession of Justus Scheetz did not pass to the plaintiffs by the sheriff’s deed. In Overfield v. Christie, 7 Serg. & Rawle, 177, in which the opinion of Judge Washington in Potts v. Gilbert, 3 Wash. C. C. R. 475, was overruled, it was settled that the adverse possession of an occupant without right might be transferred to a purchaser, and continued by him for the residue of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Overfield v. ChristieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1821
3Cited by19 opinions
- London v. KingsleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Caruthers v. LeonardTexas Commission of Appeals · 1923
- Pruner EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Baylor v. SoskaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Stark Et Ux. v. Lardin, Exr.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.