Rutter v. Carothers
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Shelby Circuit Court. — Rem. Nat. M. Shelton, Judge. (1) The judgment rendered for the plaintiffs was right and proper, and it was error to grant defendants a new trial. (2) The defendants seek to hold the land in question exclusively, solely on the Statute of Limitations. It is not possible for one to acquire title to real estate under any section of our Statute of Limitations, without an adverse holding for some length of time.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Shelby Circuit Court. — Rem. Nat. M. Shelton, Judge. (1) The judgment rendered for the plaintiffs was right and proper, and it was error to grant defendants a new trial. (2) The defendants seek to hold the land in question exclusively, solely on the Statute of Limitations. It is not possible for one to acquire title to real estate under any section of our Statute of Limitations, without an adverse holding for some length of time. Our statute is based upon the fact of an adverse possession and claim of ownership. The answers of the defendants do. not allege and count upon an…
1Opinion of the CourtLamm, P. J.
In a suit under section 650 to declare and establish title in 176 acres of land in Shelby county, judgment went for plaintiffs for an undivided •one-third interest, subject to a charge of $383 in favor *636of defendants. Afterwards a new trial was awarded on defendants ’ motion. From that order plaintiffs appeal.
Summarized, the petition charges and the agreed statement of facts shows that James H. Carothers was twice married. His first wife died. By her he had one child, Alvira. Alvira married Chatman Speight and died leaving children, married and unmarried, minors and adults, who, with their…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Jackson ex dem. Swartwout v. JohnsonNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- Smith ex dem. Teller v. BurtisNew York Supreme Court · 1812
- Cockrill v. HutchinsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- DeHatre v. EdmondsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Hinters v. HintersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Stack v. General Baking Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1920
- BCI Corp. v. Charlebois Construction Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1984
- State v. Hallenberg-Wagner Motor Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1937
- Howard v. ScottSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- Boatmen's National Bank v. FleddermanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1944
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.