Gathings v. Miller
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the circuit court of Clay county. Hon. W. F. Stevens, Judge. Miller, the appellee, was the plaintiff in the court below; the appellants, Gathings & Watson, were defendants there. The opinion states the facts of the case. 1. On the trial the plaintiff did not introduce any record or paper evidence of title, but relied on adverse possession.
Read the full summary
From the circuit court of Clay county. Hon. W. F. Stevens, Judge. Miller, the appellee, was the plaintiff in the court below; the appellants, Gathings & Watson, were defendants there. The opinion states the facts of the case. 1. On the trial the plaintiff did not introduce any record or paper evidence of title, but relied on adverse possession. The law is well settled that in the absence of a record or paper evidence of title that adverse possession extends only to the land actually occupied. Welborn v. Anderson, 37 Miss., 163, 164; McLeary v. Anthony, 54 Miss., 710, 711- The plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, C. J.
This was an action of trespass brought by the appellee against the appellants for cutting trees on a strip of land lying along the line between the northwest J of section 14, and the west £ of the northeast J of the same section.
The appellee, on the trial below, introduced no record or paper title to the northwest J, but did offer evidence that he claimed the same. In the absence of record or paper title, the appellee could only have maintained his action by establishing a concurrence of possession and claim of ownership, but this he totally failed to do. It is perfectly shown by the evidence…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Consumers Veneer Co. v. ChestnutMississippi Supreme Court · 1951