Crocker v. Collins

Citations

• 37 S.C. 327
• 15 S.E. 951
• 1892 S.C. LEXIS 14

Syllabus

<p>1. Demurrer—Inaccuracy in Name.—If the name of the defendant, a municipal corporation, is not correctly stated in the complaint, demurrer is not the proper mode of objecting.</p> <p>2. Ibid.—Motion to Make More Definite.—The allegations of this complaint were sufficient to show that the acts complained of were done by the executive officer of the defendant corporation; if more distinctness and particularity was desired of defendant, motion to that end, and not demurrer, was the proper mode of procedure.</p> <p>3. Ibid.—Statements of Complaint.—The question, whether title to a street or public alley of a town can be acquired against the town by adverse possession, cannot be raised by demurrer, where there is no allegation in the complaint that the land in dispute had ever been, in fact, a street or alley.</p> <p>4. Municipal Corporation—Streets—Adverse Possession—Estoppel.—Inasmuch as a municipal corporation has no right to alien its public streets and ways, no presumption of a title once acquired thereto from the corporation can arise. Therefore, the adverse holding of a street or alley for the statutory period gives no title as against a town to the adverse holder, but such holding, if accompanied with other circumstances, may operate to estop the town from now asserting its right to the use.</p> <p>5. Ibid.'—Ibid.—Abandonment.—Upon the same principle, mere non-use by the town of a street or alley for twenty years will not amount to such abandonment as would destroy the rights of the public to their renewed use.</p>