McNamara v. Seaton

Citations

• 82 Ill. 498

Syllabus

<p>1. Boundary line —parties concluded by, if established by agreement. Where adjoining land owners agree upon a boundary line, and enter into possession and improve the lands according to the line tlms agreed upon, they will be concluded from afterwards disputing that the line agreed upon is the true one, even when the Statute of Limitations has not run.</p> <p>2. Limitation—possession must be adverse, to bar a■ recovery under statute. Where one of two adjoining land owners has possession for over twenty years of a portion of the other’s land, by reason of the division fence not being on the line, such possession will not bar a recovery by the true owner, unless the fence was agreed upon as the boundary line, and the possession taken and held in pursuance of such agreement, or unless the possession is adverse to the title of the true owner.</p> <p>3. Possession—of part of adjoining tract, when adverse. Where the owner of land, in inclosing the same, extends his inclosure and embraces therein a portion of an adjoining tract, and continues in the possession thereof for twenty years, asserting ownership, he can claim the benefit of the Statute of Limitations as to all land embraced within his inclosuie.</p> <p>4. Same—without claim not adverse, so as to bar a, suit for recovery. But where the owners of adjoining tracts of land build a fence to separate them, without knowing where the line is, and without agreeing to the fence as a boundary line, and they afterwards have the lands surveyed without reference to the fence, and ascertain that the fence is not on the line, but that one has a strip of land on his side of the fence belonging to the other, and they both recógnize the line established by the survey, and the one in whose inclosure the other’s land is, makes no claim to the possession of it, the mere fact of its being in his inclosure is not such possession as will bar an action for its recovery by the true owner in twenty years.</p>