Rehkopf v. Kuhland

Citations

• 30 S.C. 234
• 9 S.E. 99
• 1889 S.C. LEXIS 95

Syllabus

<p>1. Where a purchaser at a sale under decree in partition, shows for cause why ho has not not complied, that the title is defective, and under the paper title it is defective, and its validity depends upon questions of fact, to wit, the length and character of possession — the question of title should be referred to the master for testimony and report, and not passed upon primarily on the papers submitted on the rule and return.</p> <p>2. An adverse possession that commenced in 1871 required twenty years to ripen into a right, and though continued after the act of 1873, which limited the time to ten years, it was unaffected by that statute ; for the act of 1873 was only an amendment to a title of the code from which were excepted “cases where the right of action had already accrued.”</p>