Case ID: ohio_15/html/0013-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Birchard, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lessee of Richard Waldron and others vs. Cornelius Woodcock.
    A Defendant failing in Ejectment, on the ground that the land improved by him is without the bounds of his title-deed, is not .entitled to recover the value of his improvements, under the act for the relief of Occupying Claimants of lands.
    This was an action of Ejectment, ‘reserved in Delaware County.
    The question was a controversy about a boundary. Both plaintiff and defendant were bounded by a certain section line, and the recovery of the plaintiff depended upon fixing it in a certain place. The title-deeds of the plaintiff bounded him on the south by the section.line; and the defendant, in like manner, was bounded on the north by the same line. There were two lines, each of which was claimed as the true line.
    The case comes before this Court on a motion for relief under the Occupying Claimant law, the defendant in ejectment claiming the right to recover the value of his improvements made on lands outside of his title-deeds.
    
      Sweetzer 8f Barnes, in support of the Motion.
    
      T. W. Powell, and Finch Jones, contra.
    
      In Bank.
    Dec. Term, 1846.
   Birchard, J.

Motion Refused.