Mullaney v. Duffy

Citations

• 145 Ill. 559
• 33 N.E. 750

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence—to show boundary—general reputation. When the location of a private boundary depends upon showing a public boundary, the latter maybe shown byproof of common or general reputation. So, when in ejectment to fix the boundary between two lots it becomes a question whether the center of a street is the south line of a quarter section, it is proper to admit evidence tending to show that the center line of the street has been for many years prior recognized and reputed to be line of the quarter section.</p> <p>2. Estoppel—by silence of party. When an estoppel is sought to be established from the silence of a party who in equity and good conscience should have spoken, if there be any ground of estoppel, it is essential that the party should have bad knowledge of the facts, and the other party have been ignorant of the truth, and have been misled into doing that which he would not have done but for such silence. If the means of knowledge of the facts are open equally to both parties, the mere silence of the one will not estop him from asserting the facts.</p> <p>3. Boundary Line—adopted by the parties, binding. This court has frequently held, that when there is an agreement as to the boundary line between two lots or tracts of land, and occupation according to such adopted line, with the making of improvements, each party will be estopped from asserting against the practical location of the line, notwithstanding the bar of the statute of limitation is incomplete. So, also, without proof of such agreement, after the lapse of more than twenty-years’ uninterrupted acquiescence in a line, the parties will be estopped thereby.</p>