Carpenter v. Carpenter
This text of 77 N.W. 703 (Carpenter v. Carpenter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
(after stating the facts). We think the learned circuit judge was in error. An ouster may be admitted by the pleadings. Newell, Ej. p. 133, § 16. The plea and notice constituted a deliberate assertion of title and possession hostile to plaintiff’s title. This, coupled with the testimony that defendant had been in possession for 12 years, claiming to own the entire title, was sufficient evidence of ouster. Fenton v. Miller, 94 Mich. 204. In addition to the authorities there cited at page 211, see, also, Newell, Ej. 134; Fenton v. Mackinac Circuit Judge, 76 Mich. 405, 409; Clason v. Rankin, 1 Duer, 337; adding s v. Canfield, 4 Conn. 482; Peterson v. Laik, 24 Mo. 541 (69 Am. Dec. 441); Whiteley v. Whiteley, 110 Mich. 556.
Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
77 N.W. 703, 119 Mich. 167, 1899 Mich. LEXIS 748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carpenter-v-carpenter-mich-1899.