Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1910-03-02
Decisions in Knox and
Waldo County Cases,
Judgement for Defendant in
Rogers VS.. naugh.
Verdict Set Aside i'm Farnsworth,
Admrs., VS.. G. F. Whiting.

Tie following rescript in a Waldo
county case has been handed down
from the law court:
Harlan H. Rogers VS.. William
Haugh. Rescript. (No opiniom. Pea
body. ].
This is real action and comes to
the law court on report. The writ was
dated Nov. 25, 1905 At the trial. April
term, 1909. the defendant pleaded null
disseizin and by brief statement claim
ed title in himself, which plea and
brief statement are as follows:
"And now the said defendant, in the
above entitled action comes and de-
tends his right. when, etc, and says
that he did not disseizc the said de-
PENDANT, as he in his writ and declara-
ton aforesaid, above suppoSes; and
Of this puts himself upon the country.
BY ]. S. Hartman, his attorney. And
the PLAINTIFF likewise by w. P. Thomp-
son, his attorney.
Brief statement: And for brief state
nent the defendant says, that he is
seized in fee simple, of the premises
demanded by the defendant in his
said writ, ard that he has been in
possession thereof for the last three
years with denial or interruption
and that said defendant has not been
in possession nor has he the right to
possession of said demanded prem
les"
Both plaintiff and defendant claim title
to the premises by virtue of tax deeds,
copies of which are included i'll the re-
ported case The plaintiffs title is under
a ta-- deed from Maurice w. Lord, col
lector of taxes for the city of Belfast.
Waldo county, Maine, bearing date Dec.
%, 1905, and recorded in the registry of
deeds of said county April 80, 1908, and
purports to be for non-payment of the tax
in the year 1904
The defendant in support of his title
introduced the following deeds: Deed
from NJ. G. Hill, collector of taxes for the
city of Belfast to the city of Belfast,
dated Dec 9. 1902, recorded Dec. 5, 1904,
for tax assessed in 1901; dated from NJ. c.
Norton, deputy sheriff, to the city of Eel
fast. dated Nov, e. 1904, an judgment for
tax assessed III 190s; deed from c. II. Sar-
gent. collector of taxes for the city of
Belfast, to the city of Belfast, dated Dec
y. 1904 recorded Dec. T., 1906, for tax
assessed in 1903; deed from Charles r
Thompson, collector of taxes for the city
of Belfast, to city of Belfast, now in the
hands of the city clerk urecorded, dat
ed Dec 2S. 1907, for the tax assessed in
the year 1906; and quit claim deed of Ell
bridge S. Pitcher, treasurer of the city of
Belfast to the defendant. dated Dec. s.
1903, recorded Dec. TO- 1908. conveying all
the right titalc ana interest which had
accrued to the city of Belfast for the
| non-payment Of taxes, duly authorized by
| the order of the city council of the city of
Belfast
The deed of the treasurer last men,
toned, which is essential to the de-
PENDANTS title, bears date subsequent
to the date of the plaintiffs writ and
being a matter arising after the COM
mencement of the suit and before is
sue joined, it is not proveable except
under a special plea in bar to the fur
! Their maintenance of the PLAINTIFF IS
action.
Although the defendants brief state
ment under the general issue lacks
the technical formality of such a plea.
inasmuch as the plaintiff has not rails
ed the question of it's sufficiency by
demurrer. we hold that the deed is ad-
MISSILE under the special plea, and
shows that at its date the defendant
had title to the demanded premises
superior to that of the plaintiff.
Judgment for the defendant.