Ball v. Palmer
Citations
- 81 Ill. 370
Syllabus
<p>1. Possession—by heir, not adverse to co-heir. Where two of the heirs residing with the ancestor, on land owned by him at the time of his death, continue to reside there after his death, but set up no claim to an exclusive ownership of the land, their possession at the time of the death of the ancestor, and subsequently, is not adverse to the other heirs.</p> <p>2. Adverse possession—clear evidence of a disseizin necessary, as between co-heirs. Where one of the heirs is in possession at the time of the death of the ancestor, it requires clear and satisfactory proof of a subsequent disseizin of the co-heirs, to characterize such possession as becoming adverse, so as, by lapse of time, to bar the right of entry of the co-heir.</p> <p>3. Disseizin—of co-tenant. To constitute a disseizin of a co-tenant, there must be outward acts of exclusive ownership of an unequivocal character, overt and notorious, and of such a nature as, by their own import, to impart information and give notice to the co-tenant that an adverse possession and an actual disseizin are intended to be asserted against him.</p>
Judges: Scholfield
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.