Bone v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Lackawanna County to review a judgment for plaintiff in an action of ejectment. This controversy arose over a disputed boundary line between two tracts of land. Defendant had erected a fence in such a manner as to include, as plaintiff claimed, a strip of land 5% feet wide and 150 feet long which belonged to the latter; and this action was brought to recover possession of the same.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Lackawanna County to review a judgment for plaintiff in an action of ejectment. This controversy arose over a disputed boundary line between two tracts of land. Defendant had erected a fence in such a manner as to include, as plaintiff claimed, a strip of land 5% feet wide and 150 feet long which belonged to the latter; and this action was brought to recover possession of the same. At tire trial defendant offered evidence tending to show that the plaintiff had no authority to take and hold and recover such an amount of land as would be involved in a recovery from…
1Per curiam
The question covered by the 14th and 15th specifications of error cannot be successfully invoked in the trial of this case. They do not propose to attack the validity of the title to this, particular piece of land.
By a broad offer unlimited as to the time of acquisition, it is. proposed to prove a want of capacity to hold, which can be asserted by the commonwealth only, and in a direct proceeding.
The remaining questions were those of facts, and they were well submitted by the learned judge.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Wunderle v. WunderleIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
- American Mortgage Co. v. TennilleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1891