Lake v. Hancock ex rel. Payne

Citations

• 38 Fla. 53

Syllabus

<p>1. In an action of ejectment proof by defendant that third persons other than the plaintiff have executed to such defendant a deed of conveyance of the premises in dispute, unaccompanied by any proof of posession or title in such grantors in said conveyance, is no evidence of title in sucn defendant. Especially is such a deed of no avail to a party defendant who has admitted to the plaintiff that he knew the grantors therein did not own the land conveyed thereby, and that the deed was of no validity.</p> <p>2. A vendee having acquired posession of land from his vendor under an executory contract to purchase the same, and haying failed to pay for the same, and to surrender possession upon demand after he had forfeited his right thereto, isestopped, when sued by his vendor for the possession of the land so wrongfully withheld, to dispute his vendor’s title or to . set up as a defense any outstanding title acquired by him, the yendee, during the continuance of such possession.</p> <p>3. An unrecorded deed is good and effectual against subsequent purchasers, unless such purchasers bought the promises without notice of the former conveyance, and for a valuable consideration.</p> <p>4. The want of notice on the part of a purchaser of premises, which his grantors had previously conveyed by an unrecorded deed, need not be shown otherwise than by showing the absence of a record, which is prima facie sufficient.</p> <p>5. The burden of proof is upon the party who claims by virtue of a priority of record, against a prior but unrecorded deed, to-show affirmatively by the payment of a valuable consideration, which must be shown by some other evidence than the mere recital of it in a deed.</p> <p>6. In an action of ejectment where the evidence only tends to-show that the land sued for was included with other lands in the declaration filed m an action of ejctment formerly pending between the same parties, but for some reason not shown was omitted from the verdict and judgment,