Noble v. McFarland

Citations

• 51 Ill. 226

Syllabus

<p>1. Limitations—married, women—of the effect of the act of 1861. The act of 1861, securing to married women the enjoyment of their separate property, does not operate to divest the husband of an estate by the curtesy in his wife’s lands, which had vested before the passage of that act; and while the husband and wife may join in an action to recover the lands of the latter, thus situated, they are not bound to do so, and the three years within which,the wife must commence her action, under the limitation act of 1839, after her disability is removed,- will not commence to run until after the death of her husband.</p> <p>2. Ouster—what constitutes—as between tenants in common. Where one of two tenants in common of land, obtains the actual, exclusive possession of the whole tract, claiming it as his own, and denying any right of his co-tenant in the premises, and upon ejectment being brought against him by his co-tenant to recover his interest, the defendant, instead of entering a disclaimer as to the plaintiff’s interest in the land, pleaded not guilty and set up the statute of limitations: JBeld, that these acts on the part of the defendant constituted an ouster, and relieved the plaintiff from the necessity of proving an ouster by any other evidence.</p>