Torrance v. Betsy
Mississippi Supreme Court
In error from the Circuit Court of Yalabusha county. Hon. William S. Harris, judge. On the 10th day of May, A. D. 1853, the defendant in error commenced an action under the New Pleading Act, against the plaintiff in error, in the Circuit Court of Yalabusha county, for the recovery of a quarter section of land lying in said county, and which she claimed title to, under the provisions of the Dancing Rabbit Treaty, granting certain reservations of land to the fatherless…
Read the full summary
In error from the Circuit Court of Yalabusha county. Hon. William S. Harris, judge. On the 10th day of May, A. D. 1853, the defendant in error commenced an action under the New Pleading Act, against the plaintiff in error, in the Circuit Court of Yalabusha county, for the recovery of a quarter section of land lying in said county, and which she claimed title to, under the provisions of the Dancing Rabbit Treaty, granting certain reservations of land to the fatherless children among the Choctaw Indians. Leave was given at the May term of said court to amend the declaration, which was done by…
1Opinion of the Court
Peb, cubiam.
The court below erred in rejecting the deed offered in evidence by the defendant on the trial. A plaintiff in ejectment, or in a proceeding to recover land, under the late Pleading Act, must, in order to recover, have the title to the land at the trial; otherwise, if a recovery be had at all, it will be only for the purpose of carrying the costs and giving the party damages for the time he is illegally kept out of possession. If judgment be entered in such case for the land, it will be with a perpetual stay of execution.
Under any view of the law, therefore, the deed was improperly…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Ex parte SayreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1881
- Gibbs v. McGuireMississippi Supreme Court · 1893
- Littelle v. Creek Lumber Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1911