New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-05-07
OF Conflicting Land Claim

Adjudication OF Conflicting Land Claims.
An important decision was on Monday
rendered by our State Supreme Court, in
case from East Baton Rouge, in regard to
conflicting claims under land grants,
through the State and United States, and
the law regulating pay for improvements
made by the United States possessor of the
land.
Justice Howell delivered the opinion of
the court which is as follows:
Cullen .McCastle Va. j. j. B. CLANCY ct
al.-Appeal from the District COnrt for the
parish Of East Baton Rouge.
This is q petisoiJ action in which plar-
tiff claims title to certain tract OF land
from the State Of Louisiana unUer act OF
Con gress of May 20, 1896. by virtue OF
which act the State selected the SAID land
in Nav, 1856, and issued to him patent IN
1873 He asks that the patent issued by
the United States to j. j. b. CLANCY In
,June. 1860, be declared null as having been
issued in error and that he be put in pos
sessiOn. :.
The defendants in possession claim by
donation from j. j. B. CLANCY, to whom
patent was issued by the United States, and
in case of eviction they claim the value OF
improvements
Judgment was rendered in taver OF PLAIN
tiff, declaring him the owner of the land,
annullipg defendants title allowing plain
tiff rent from October, 1873, directing him
to be put in possession, reserving to defend
ants the right to remove their improve
ments and giving them judgment against
their warranters.
The defendant and warranters appealed.
It is clearly shown that the land in con-
SLn md oaia hu
the State in 1856. as school lands, under the
provisions of the above cited act of Con-
gress, and that the patent issued to- j. b.
CLANCY by the United States in 1860, for
several different tracts erroneousiy included
this one, and that when the mistake was
discovered the officers in New Orleans we're
instructed to procure the patent from
CLANCY to have it corrected.
The United States parted with their title
when the selection was made be- the State
of Louisiana in 1876, and the title remained
ia the State until it was vested in the plain
tiff, consequently no title vested in CLANCY,
the patentee.
But we think while be could not pre-
scribe against the State or United States he
was such a pOssessOr as to require the
plaintiff either to REIN burse the value of
the materials and the price of workman
ship in making the improvements o. to
reimburse sum equal to the enhanced
value of the soil under the las. clause of
article 50S K. c. c.
The record does not enable Us to fix
either the value of such materials and
workmanship or the enhanced value OF
the soil resulting from the Improvements.
The case must be remanded for such pur
pose.
The rent should be allowed only from
judicial demand. The warranters have
urged 20 complaint before US.
1t is therefore ordered that the jud gment
appealed from be amended in favor of Mrs
S. A. Hunt, so as to allow rent from the
fifteenth January, 1874, and to annul the
reservation of the right OF Defendant to
remove the improvements. 1t is further
ordered that this case be remanded to as
certain the value of the materials and
workmanship in making the improvements
on the land and the enhanced value of the
soil resulting therefrom. and that plaintiff
be required to make his choice whether he
will pay the value of such materials and
workmanship or the enhanced value of the
soil; costs of the appeal to be paid by the
appellee.