Case ID: h-j_3/html/0432-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Chase, Ch. j.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Saunders, Terretenant of Duley, vs. Webster.
    Appear from Harford County Court. This- was a writ of scire facias issued against the defendant, (now appellant,) as terretenant of Dairy, on a judgment rendered in that court against Daley. The defendant pleaded, that Duhy, was not seized of the lands, &c: at the time of the rendition of the judgment. At the trial, to prove a seisin of the lands in dispute, which was part of a tract called Coleraine, in Duhy, the plaintiff, (now appellee,) offered in evidence a deed from Duley, to the defendant, dated the 16th of June 1803, for part of a tract called William’s Ridge, containing 100 perches, and for ten acres, part of 
      a tract called Coleraine. He also offered parol evidence to prove that James Daley was in possession of the said land, and had been in possession of it for nine years before the execution of said deed, Upon this evidence he prayed the opinion of the court; that it might and ought to be presumed that Didey was, at the time of the said conveyance, legally seized of the said ten acres,- unless the defendant couid show that he held sáid ten' acres by another title than that derived from Duíey. Of this opinión the Court £Nicholson, Ch. J. j was, and so directed the jury. ’I*he defendant excepted; and the verdict and judgment being; against him, he appealed to this court.
    
      J W obtained a ¿tuígment .a gain-t ,1 ft, nml min'd a ttrtrc facias ih<*renn against R S.ns Ms terretenanf, Who pleaded that ,1 ft was not seized nf the land of Which he is returned tenant at the time of the judgment — that the scice 'facias «unid not hi» sun* ported without producing a grant from the* proprietary for the land, or laying a founilniiou for presuming one. But that n grant fur the land, with tin? iTeetf offered bt evidence from .T ft to Tí S. and the parol evidence, that .T ft was, and had been, in pa*/ session of the land for nine years before 1m deed to li S, would he sufficient to support the toy the plaintiff
    
      The cause was argued before Chase, Ch. J¡ and Be-; guanas, and Earle, J. by
    Y*. BucKdnan, for the Appellant.
    No Counsel appeared for the Appellee.
   Chase, Ch. j.

delivered the opinion of the court. Ting plaintiff cannot support the sciré facias against the terretenant, without producing a grant from the proprietary for the tract of land called Coleraine, or laying a sufficient founidatioii for presuming one; for Without such grant Dtiley cóüld not have been seized of the ten acres of land, at the time Of the obtention of the judgment on which the scire facias was sued out, nor could the land have been liable to execution thereon — the possession of the ten acres being by intrusion ón the proprietary.

The court are also of opinion, that the grant, with the evidence produced; would have been sufficient to have supported the issue for the plaintiff.

JUDGMENT REVERSED; AND' PROCEDENDO AWARDED.