Mann v. Sumner
Mann v. Sumner
Opinion of the Court
This case was heard by the presiding Justice without the intervention of a jury.
The presiding Justice found that the plaintiff had the better legal title to what his deeds covered and awarded him 17/18 of the lot.
To this finding the defendants except upon the ground that: “The Presiding Justice ruled that the testimony as to possession and acts, done by Joshua H. Sumner, failed to show such requisite continuity of possession for twenty years, as the law required to perfect a title by prescription to the land in suit.” The only question raised by the exceptions is whether there was any substantial evidence upon which the presiding Justice based his finding.
As his decision was in the negative, that there was not sufficient evidence to establish the requisite continuity of possession for twenty years, it is necessary to discover whether there is any substantial evidence to prove the fact oí süch continuity.
A careful examination of the record shows the negative and fully warrants the conclusion at which the Justice arrived.
Exceptions overruled.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Shirley H. Mann v. Rogers C. Sumner
- Status
- Published