Driver v. Martin
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Mississippi Circuit Court. Felix G. Taylor, Judge. f Appellees’ ancestor did not hold actual adverse possession of any portion of the lands in controversy continuously during seven years.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Mississippi Circuit Court. Felix G. Taylor, Judge. f Appellees’ ancestor did not hold actual adverse possession of any portion of the lands in controversy continuously during seven years. He could not prove his possession by declarations to that effect or the understanding of the neighbors. 90 Ga. 52. Fitful acts of ownership, in connection with payment of taxes, are not sufficient. 45 Ark. 81; 49 Ark. 266; 48 Ark. 201; 57 Ark. 104 — 5. Such intermittent “acts of ownership” as merely goiug on the land to out timber several times a year are more in the nature of trespasses than of…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
This action was brought by Martha Martin and the other heirs of Dudley Lynch, deceased, against James D. Driver, to recover the possession of a certain tract of land described in their complaint. They allege that Dudley Lynch, under whom they claim, held seven years adverse possession of the laud, and thereby acquired title to the same. Upon this possession ‘they base their claim.
The defendant answered, and denied that Lynch acquired title to the land by adverse possession or in any other manner, ■and alleged that he is vested with the legal title to the same, ■and is the owner thereof.
The…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Brown v. BocquinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
- Scott v. MillsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
- Stephens v. ShannonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
3Cited by14 opinions
- Boynton v. AshabrannerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Earle Improvement Co. v. ChatfieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Connerly v. DickinsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Cowan v. El Paso Electric Ry. Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1925
- Stokes v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.