Case ID: wright_1/html/0670-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WOOD, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

RICHARDSON v. HUGHES.
    Trespass — declaration of co-heirs — evidence to prove issue.
    It is not competent to prove the declarations as to title of one in the same relation as the plaintiffs grantor.
    If land be held by a trustee under a will, his deed may he read before or after the will — evidence is admissible which tends to prove the issue, though of itself insufficient.
    Trespass, quare clausum fregit. Plea, not guilty. Both parties claim title from Willets, one of several heirs.
    The plain tiff called a witness to prove a declaration of one of the co-heirs of Willets.
    
      Mason objected.
    
      Bell, for the plaintiff,
    objected, that before Taylor could convey, he must produce the will under which he acted as trustee.
   WOOD, J.

The witness is called to prove the declarations of one competent as a witness and inadmissible.

The defendant then offered a patent from the United States to Taylor and other executors, as trustees, and a deed from Taylor.

WOOD, J. Upon the assumption of the objection, the deed is a link in the chain of evidence, and it is of no account whether it is 649] *exhibited before or after the will. Though the deed may not by itself make out the defendant’s right, if it tend to prove it, as we think it does, it is admissible.