Westfall v. Singleton

1 Va. 291
CourtCourt of Appeals of Virginia
DecidedOctober 15, 1793
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Va. 291 (Westfall v. Singleton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Westfall v. Singleton, 1 Va. 291 (Va. Ct. App. 1793).

Opinion

The President

delivered the opinion and decree of the Court as follows :

“ If Lord Fairfax had not originally invited settlers [293]*293On his lands on the South Branch, by a promise of making them titles, he was nevertheless bound, by his advertisement of the 5th of August, 1749, to grant such titles to all persons then settled thereon. That Abel Westfall, being at that time settled on the land in dispute as a purchaser from Fanderpool, the original settler, was entitled to a grant thereof from Lord Fairfax, on the usual terms of granting his lands: and Abel, dying so entitled, in possession of the land, in the year 1755, without making a will, or other disposition of it, his equitable interest therein, descended to Cornelius Westfall, his eldest son and heir at law", who not appearing to have done any act to forfeit, or to shew that he abandoned his title, Dut on the contrary, having entered on the land, within twenty years, (the time allowed by law for his entry, if it had been a legal title, and he in the state,) he was entitled to the like grant from Lord Fairfax, which his father might have claimed. But as it appears, that the settlers within the manor, generally agreed to accept leases on the terms of Lord Fairfax's advertisement in 1749, and Cornelius himself, applied for such lease, and paid the annual rents accordingly, which amounted to his consent, to wave the claim to an absolute title, that he ought to hold the land, under the heirs, or assigns of Lord Fairfax, on the terms, and subject to the eovejaants contained in the lease.

“ That John Westfall, the younger, son of Abel, having no title in law or equity to the land, no right could be derived to Thomas Singleton from him; and therefore it is immaterial, whether their contract was for an absolute purchase, or for a term only.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Va. 291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/westfall-v-singleton-vactapp-1793.