Haile v. Cantey

Citations

• 29 S.C.L. 678

Syllabus

<p>1. Trespass to try titles. The parcel of land in dispute was an old field consisting of two or three acres; defendant in 1839 entered as the tenant of the plaintiff of a house and some lands around it, the house standing a few yards north of the disputed land, which was situated between a cross fence built by defendant in 1842, and a piece of new cleared land which the defendant had in possession there before and since. At the southern extremity of the disputed parcel was a pond immediately north of the new cleared land. The plaintiff contended that the land in dispute was a part of the tract on which the house stood, and of which he had title, whereas the defendant, admitting that he did become the tenant of the plaintiff of the house and some lands around it, contended that it was part of another tract of which he was in possession under an agreement to purchase. The plaintiff failed to make out either a paper or a statutory title against the title under which defendant claimed. It was in evidence that at a period prior to 1810 a person had lived on the grant under which plaintiff claimed, and had cultivated below the cross fence put up by defendant, to within ten or fifteen steps of the pond. In 1811 one Carwell went into possession as a tenant to this ex* tent, and enlarged it. It was afterwards called Carwell’s old field, and the proof was that it extended below the pond. The plaintiff purchased at sheriff’s sale, one of the descriptions given being the Carwell old place. It was proved that defendant had said he was tenant of plaintiff and had spoken of renting the Carwell old place from him. It was held that this was sufficient to authorize the jury in concluding, that all the land cleared by Car-well and passing under the name of his old place, was rented by defendant.</p>