Conover v. Russ

Citations

• 29 Fla. 338

Syllabus

<p>Ejectment — Maps as Evidence.</p> <p>■Where the land in controversy in an ejectment suit is located adjacent to the boundary line between two counties, the location of which boundary line is involved in such doubt, uncertainty ■and dispute as to render it seriously doubtful as to which of said two counties said land belongs, and the defendant relies entirely upon a tax title to the land, acquired in one of such counties ; and it appears that the land was assessed and sold for the same year’s taxes in both counties; and the plaintiff'has redeemed from the sale in one of them, but not from the sale in the county that resulted in defendant’s tax title. The material issue, under these circumstances, that most vitally affects the validity of such tax title, is the true Zooms of the land. In the trial of this issue the official maps of the county in which the plaintiff claimed the land to be, and from the tax sale in which lie redeemed them, are entirely proper and highly pertinent evidence to throw light upon the leading fact in issue, the true locus of such land ; and it is error to exclude such maps from evidence, when they show the land to be part of the county in which the tax redemption has been made.</p>