(Download) "Kurth Et Al. v. Le Jeune" by Supreme Court of Montana * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Kurth Et Al. v. Le Jeune
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 20, 1928
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 59 KB
Description
Ejectment ? Mesne Profits ? Real Property ? Boundaries ? Monuments Controlling, When ? Evidence ? Declarations of Grantor ? Statute of Limitations. Ejectment ? Recovery of Mesne Profits ? Statute of Limitations. 1. The period of limitation for an action in ejectment, with claim for mesne profits ? the value and use of the property during the period of its wrongful withholding ? is ten years, under sections 9015 and 9028, Revised Codes 1921. - Page 101 Same ? Evidence ? Declarations of Grantor Relating to Property ? When Admissible. 2. To render the declaration of a grantor of real property relating thereto admissible against the grantee, under section 10510, Revised Codes 1921, the party making the offer must show that it was made while the declarant was holding the title to the property in controversy, that he was in fact the grantor of the party against whom the declaration was offered, and that the declaration was against interest. Same ? Real Property ? Boundaries ? Declarations of Grantor Relating to Removal of Government Monument Held Inadmissible in Evidence. 3. Under the above rule held in an action in ejectment that evidence that the grantor of the land in question had told the witness that he had moved the government monument in order to get land that belonged to a neighbor was inadmissible as having been made before he had title, and that a similar declaration, made when he thought he was dying, was likewise inadmissible because made after he had sold the land and had no longer any interest in it other than that represented by the warranty deed he had given his grantee, an interest insufficient to take the declaration out of the operation of the rule declared by section 10510, supra. Same ? Real Property ? Boundaries ? When Government Monuments Controlling. 4. In an action in ejectment in which the paramount question was whether a former owner of the land had removed a government quarter-section corner monument so as to include an adjoining tract within his own, held, under subdivision 2 of section 10683, Revised Codes 1921, that in the absence of testimony contradictory of that of plaintiffs that it never had been moved, the rights of the parties were governed by the monuments upon the ground and that rendition of judgment for defendant was error.