Custer chronicle. [volume] (Custer City, Black Hills, D.T. [S.D.]) 1880-1890, 1881-04-30
JUDGE MOODY'S DECISION.
In the case of Geo. w. Smith VS.. Fred.
Haver.

IN tn" District Court. First Judicial
District, Custer County. Dakota Ter
rlturv.
Geo. w. Smith. plaintiff vs.. Frederick
~!iaNer, defendant.
This action having been brought to
trial before the court, and a jury having
by consent waived, and the issues OF
fact having been submitted 10 the court;
and all The evidence in the action hay
ing been submitted, heard and consider
ei by me. F! make and file the following
findings of fact add conclusions Of law.
FINDINGS OF ACT.
lst. That the premises in controversy
in THIS action are situated in the county
of Custer and Trtritorv of Dakota.
2nl. That in the month of March.
1919, the land in controversy were un-
occupied, and u~nSlrveyed public lands
of the United States; that at said time
the plaintiff undertook to obtain posses
sion of 100 acres Of land. including the
iand in controversy, and for that purpo Sc
measure! off in Il square form said l6O
acrrs of land. and placed a stake or post
about four feet high at each corner of the
tract the boundaries of which tract
are more particularly described in the
complaint in thi, action, and the plat
thereof hereto attached and made Il part
Of these findings.
5rd. That at the time the plaintiff 50
marked The boundaries Of said premises.
there were thereon tWo old deserted log
cabins. which are marked respectively
on the plat ~" and "T," and also about
three acre. of land on the east end Of
the tract, which had been broken aud
fenced. and thereafter abandoned by
some other parties.
4ih. That during the summer of 1879.
the plaintiff plowed The said three acres.
and brOl g in addition thereto about two
acres more, making five acres in all, and
fenced the IN and cultivated and rails
cd a crop upon said five acres during
that year.
oll. liIiA H. NV Nttrlil vi lOic,
and the commencement Of the winter Of
- and 80. and before the defendant
sought 10 obtain possession OF any lDr-
ton of said land. or mtde any claim
thereto, the plaintiff proceeded to erect
4 small building on said land, for "A
dwelling house. which was partially
A,,t ,i,inl .,,1 .,il ItNHni-I.l urIa,, lo
defendant committed the acts ~herein-
af,cr stated, and also used and occupied
the said two cabins spoken of. and also
p'owed al the other end OF the tract, an
Other small piece OF ground, and haul
cd upon the ground. for fencing purposes
about Two hundred posts, some of which
were distributed along the line of the
plaintiffs fence, as thereafter erected.
The points at which these improve
ments We're made by plaintiff, are desig-
mated upon the plat hereto attached.
9th. That piain,iH proceeded with
reasonable diligence 10 inclose the
ground in controversy, by hauling fenc-
ing material thereon to inclose all that
portion Of the 100 acres, which was sus-
ccptible of cultivation, and was thus en-
--e+a@han~lhe defendant commenced
IL, iySI5%taaTgcc o[t %ae~ sv,r hereiuaftar
stated.
7th. That in The month of January,
1880, while the plaintiff was SO engaged
in hauling materials for the purpose Of
fencing the land in dispute, and in max
ing other preparations for improving
said premises, the defendant went upon
the land in controversy and commenced
the erection of Il fence thereon, III a
manner that is called a leaning fence
that is with posts and ~poles-to ~inclose
the land in controversy, including the
plaintiff improvements, tn wit: His
blowing fenced, with the other blowing,
the building partially completed for the
dwelling, and the two log cabins.
Sth. That at the time the defendant
MAS engaged i'm making hi" improve