Skip to main content
· 1/3/1916

Cannon v. Jackson

Citations

  • 252 Pa. 257
  • 97 A. 468
  • 1916 Pa. LEXIS 603

Syllabus

<p>Ejectment — Tenants in common — Possession by one cotenant— Adverse possession — Case for jury.</p> <p>1. Possession by one cotenant is presumed to be for the benefit of both, and the question whether the possession of one is adverse and amounts to an ouster of the other is usually for the jury to determine from the circumstances of the case. The burden is on the cotenant in possession to show by clear and positive proof the time and circumstances under which his possession began to be adverse and that such adverse possession was brought to the knowledge of his eotenant.</p> <p>2. The open, notorious and uninterrupted possession of the whole property by one tenant in common for twenty-one years, claiming the whole land as his own, and taking the whole profits exclusively to himself, is evidence from which a jury may draw the conclusion of an ouster, but does not afford a legal presumption of ouster; the question whether the fiduciary character of the relation has been determined by a decisive act, or by a course of conduct bringing home notice, to the party to be affected by it, of the change of the character of the possession, is for the jury.</p> <p>3. In an action of ejectment to recover an undivided half interest in a farm, which plaintiff claimed as the illegitimate child of a woman who had been cotenant thereof, defendant offered a deed for the entire tract from the other cotenant, a sister of the woman under whom plaintiff claimed and who had been in possession for twenty-three years; defendant alleged that his grantor had acquired title by adverse possession. It appeared that defendant’s grantor had been the administratrix of her sister’s estate, and it did not appear that she had expressly denied plaintiff’s interest in the property. It further appeared that plaintiff had resided with defendant’s grantor on the farm until her marriage; she had admitted, in a deposition taken for use in another proceeding, that defendant’s grantor was the sole surviving m

Judges: Brown, Feazee, Frazer, Mestrezat, Moschzisker, Potter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced 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.