Case ID: ky_160/html/0641-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "William Rogers Clay, Commissioner", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Logan v. Williams.
    (Decided November 4, 1914.)
    Appeal from Whitley Circuit Court.
    ■Modification of Opinion. — The opinion in this case (159 Ky., 412), is modified to the extent of withdrawing that part which held that plaintiff might have shown title by proving that his tenants actually entered on tracts adjoining the tract in question and embraced in the same deeds, with the intention of claiming the tract in controversy, and that they did so claim and hold for the statutory period, this language not being necessary to a decision of the case.
    STEPHENS & STEELY for appellant.
    H. C. GILHS for appellee.
   Opinion of the Court by

William Rogers Clay, Commissioner

Sustaining petition for modification and withdrawing portion of former opinion.

In our former opinion we used the following lanquage:

“As several tracts of land were conveyed and separately described in the deeds under which plaintiff claimed, he might have shown title by proving that his tenants actually entered on tracts adjoining the tract in question and embraced in the deeds under which he' claims, with the intention of claiming and holding the tract in controversy, and that they did so claim and hold it for the statutory period.”

Appellant has filed a petition for modification, asking that the foregoing language be withdrawn from the opinion. In view of the fact that the language used is not necessary to the decision of the case, and of the further fact that it may lead to confusion unless qualified or explained, we deem it best to sustain the petition for modification and withdraw the paragraph referred to, and it is so ordered.