Wilkinson v. Bottoms

Supreme Court of Alabama

Wilkinson v. Bottoms

56 So. 948, 174 Ala. 122, 1911 Ala. LEXIS 359

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedNovember 30, 1911

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 56 So. 948 (Wilkinson v. Bottoms) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wilkinson v. Bottoms, 56 So. 948, 174 Ala. 122, 1911 Ala. LEXIS 359 (Ala. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

Statutory ejectment. The Pleasant Ridge road, in Dale county, ran north and south through the respective “40’s” of Wilkinson and Bottoms, leaving, there was testimony tending to show, a part of the Bottoms “40” on the west side of the road and a part of the Wilkinson “40” on the east side of the road. There was testimony tending to show that W. H. Bottoms and Levi Wilkinson, about 18 years ago, exchanged their respective plots of land across the road from the body of their respective lands, thereby, by agreement, making the road the line between their respective possessions. There was, also, testimony to show that W. H. Bottoms and Levi Wilkinson each exercised acts of possession over the respective subjects of the-exchange, some of the testimony tending to show such acts for more than 10 years.

Where two parties exchange real estate, and enter into possession under a bona fide claim of ownership, such possession is adverse each to the other; and, if maintained for the requisite period, with all the legal elements of adverse possession, attending the possession; [125]*125title thereto will invest in each bargainor. — Brown v. Bailey, 159 Pa. St. 121, 28 Atl. 245; Moss v. Culver, 64 Pa. 414, 3 Am. Rep. 601; Jermyn v. McClure, 195 Pa. St. 245, 45 Atl. 938.

It is well settled with ns that the declarations of one in the possession of land, “narrative of past transactions in respect thereto,” are inadmissible. — Dothard v. Denson, 72 Ala. 541; Couch v. Couch, 141 Ala. 361, 37 South. 405, among others. Such was the character of the testimony offered by defendants and excluded by the court. Accordingly there was no error in rulings made the basis of assignments 1 to 5, inclusive.

There was no error in overruling the motion for new trial. The testimony asserted by the movant to be newly discovered was cumulative only.

The judgment must be affirmed.

Affirmed.

All tlie Justices concur, save Dowdell, C. J., not sitting.

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

McCLELLAN, J.

Statutory ejectment. The Pleasant Ridge road, in Dale county, ran north and south through the respective “40’s” of Wilkinson and Bottoms, leaving, there was testimony tending to show, a part of the Bottoms “40” on the west side of the road and a part of the Wilkinson “40” on the east side of the road. There was testimony tending to show that W. H. Bottoms and Levi Wilkinson, about 18 years ago, exchanged their respective plots of land across the road from the body of their respective lands, thereby, by agreement, making the road the line between their respective possessions. There was, also, testimony to show that W. H. Bottoms and Levi Wilkinson each exercised acts of possession over the respective subjects of the-exchange, some of the testimony tending to show such acts for more than 10 years.

Where two parties exchange real estate, and enter into possession under a bona fide claim of ownership, such possession is adverse each to the other; and, if maintained for the requisite period, with all the legal elements of adverse possession, attending the possession; [125]*125title thereto will invest in each bargainor. — Brown v. Bailey, 159 Pa. St. 121, 28 Atl. 245; Moss v. Culver, 64 Pa. 414, 3 Am. Rep. 601; Jermyn v. McClure, 195 Pa. St. 245, 45 Atl. 938.

It is well settled with ns that the declarations of one in the possession of land, “narrative of past transactions in respect thereto,” are inadmissible. — Dothard v. Denson, 72 Ala. 541; Couch v. Couch, 141 Ala. 361, 37 South. 405, among others. Such was the character of the testimony offered by defendants and excluded by the court. Accordingly there was no error in rulings made the basis of assignments 1 to 5, inclusive.

There was no error in overruling the motion for new trial. The testimony asserted by the movant to be newly discovered was cumulative only.

The judgment must be affirmed.

Affirmed.

All tlie Justices concur, save Dowdell, C. J., not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 So. 948, 174 Ala. 122, 1911 Ala. LEXIS 359, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilkinson-v-bottoms-ala-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack