The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-10-20
DORIAN V. wEsrERvITcH.~

Ns statutorv Action of Ejectment--AppeaI
 from the Circuit Court of Mobile.
 Il. Eiectment; plaintiff can prove that deed offered in evidence includes lands described in complaint In an action of ejectment, 1t is competent TOT the plaintiff, upon the examination OF a civil engineer who had surveyed the land sued for. to ask the witness IT the lands described in the complaint constitute a part of the lands descrio- ed in A deed handed to the witness, ana which the plaintiff offered In evioence:
 2. Same; adverse possession: proot of how much land plaintim claimeo.-- In an action of ejectment, where the plaintiffs claim of title py virtue VI adverse possession under a deed con stitutinr color of title, 1t is competent upon the examination of plaintiff as witness. to ask how much land the plaintiff had been claiming to own ar fer the execution of the deed under which the plaintiff claimed. 3. Adverse possesetoni void @deeo admissible in evidence, as constituting color of title .--In an action of eject ment. where the plaintiff claims title to the land sued for by virtue Of ad- verse possession under color or tltIe, deed purporting to convey said Ianos to the plaintiff, though not property executed and void as conveyance Is admissible in evidence to show the ex. tent of the plaintiffs possession, and as constituting cokor of title.
 A. Tenants in common; co-tenant can maintain ejectment.-A tenant Tn common has such an interest In the lands of the co-tenancy as entities him to the enjoyment of the entire estate as against a stranger;, and, therefore, one of several co-tenants can alone maintain an action of e5ectment against a stranger to try the title to the lands owned in common.
 E. Ejectment; color of title; admis- sibility of deed with uncertain descrip- tion TO constitute color Of tttie, lt IS not necessary that the deed under which the party claims snouia pc so definite in the description of the lands admitted to be conveyed, that there sbouId be no uncertainty in 1t, provid- ed if is such as will enable surveyor to ascertain and locate the land; and, therefore a deed, though uncertain In ita description, if sufficiently certain to enable the land to be located, Is ad- missibIe in evidence as color of title.
 6. Etectment; proof of possession hv testimony of third person. In an action of ejectment where the plain tiff and the defendant claim titie py adverse possession, the testimony or the witness for the defendant that the father of the defendant. under whom tha deSendant claims, was in tine pos session of the lands for ten or fifteen wears. is admissible; such testimony tending to support a claim of adverse rosaeaeion on the part of defendant ana those under whom he held.
 T Etectment; adverse possession' ohar1a of court to jury.--In an action oT eiectment. where the plaintin and dafendant each claims adverse posses sion for the statutory period necessary to nerfect title in himself, and neither shows imminent of title better than the other, and there is eVloehce on .ne nart of each tending to support his S,Iaint,fS had A better right of posses sion to beEin with than the defendant aod which take away from the Jury tto con alteration of the ctAlnlcting ev- tdence as to who had prior possession are erroneous and should not De gwen
 Sare. same; same. In such oase where there is evidence tending to support the hypothesis thereon. charge asserts correct proposition. and should be given at the request oh the defendant which instructs the Jury that if they believe that the plaintiff limited her claim to the land men tioned in the deed made to her aI- though she has not claimed the lana described in the complaint Tor ten wears continuously under said deed, then she would not be entitled to re" cover. although the jury may believe the land sued for is embraced in the descrintion contained in said deed.
 9. Deed as color of title; not neces- sarv for it to be recorded Ut Is not necessary to make a deed effective as a color of title that 1t should be re- corded.
 Reversed and remanded.
 Opinion by Haralson, J.