Llewellyn v. Buechley
Llewellyn v. Buechley
Opinion of the Court
On the trial of this case in the court below, the appellee claimed title to the property in controversy by reason of actual occupancy or possession of it by herself and predecessors for a period of twenty-one years ; and the real question was whether there was sufficient evidence to submit to the jury of such possession by her as is required by law. The assignments of error raise the question here. The jury were instructed “ that nothing short of an actual, continued, visible, notorious, distinct and hostile or adverse possession for twenty-one years will give title under the statute of limitations.” Under this proper instruction they found from the evidence, which was sufficient to justify their finding, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover, and the judgment on their verdict is therefore affirmed.
Reference
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Statute of limitations—Adverse possession of land—Evidence—Ejectment. Nothing short of an actual, continued, visible, notorious, distinct and hostile or adverse possession of land for twenty-one years will give title under the statute of limitations. In an action of ejectment where the defendant shows a good record title and the plaintiff claims by adverse possession, a verdict and judgment for plaintiff will be sustained where the evidence for the plaintiff tended to show that she and her predecessors in title had claimed the land in dispute for forty years before plaintiff was dispossessed by defendant, that they cultivated a portion of it, took fruit from trees growing on it, dried clothes upon it, kept pigs on it, erected and maintaiued a bake oven on it, and that at one time the land was fenced.