Ege v. Sidle
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error, to Common Pleas of Cumberland county. June 5. This was an ejectment, brought by Mary Ege, surviving executor of Michael Ege, deceased, the plaintiff in error, and plaintiff below, against Henry Sidle and George F. Car], to recover three Mndred and fifty acres of land.
Read the full summary
Error, to Common Pleas of Cumberland county. June 5. This was an ejectment, brought by Mary Ege, surviving executor of Michael Ege, deceased, the plaintiff in error, and plaintiff below, against Henry Sidle and George F. Car], to recover three Mndred and fifty acres of land. On the trial, the plaintiff gave the following evidence :— Application, by Michael Ege, for four warrants, dated 23d of January, 1794; a warrant to Thomas Duncan, for four hundred acres, in Allen township, dated 23d of January, 1794; survey thereon, dated 21st of October, 1794, which was returned; application of John…
1Opinion of the CourtRogers, J.
In Shomberger v. Becht, 5 Watts, 194, and French v. Seely, 6 Watts, 292, it is ruled, “that the decision of the board of property upon a caveat, is final and conclusive of the rights of the parties, unless an ejectment, which is in the nature of an appeal, be brought by him against whom it was made, within six months; and this, whether the parties claim pnder warrants or improvements.” So in Harper v. The Mechanics’ Bank, 7 Watts & Serg. 211, it is said, that it is the duty of the deputy-surveyor to note on his surveys any interference, or adverse claim, and that such entry operates as a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Harper v. Farmers' & Mechanics' BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1844
- Shoenburger v. BechtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
- French v. SeelySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837