Case: GUARANTY TITLE & TRUST CORPORATION, RECEIVER, VUE DE L'EAU COMPANY, v. THE UNITED STATES
Abbreviation: Guaranty Title & Trust Corp. v. United States
Decision Date: 1924-02-18
Docket Number: 
Citation: 59 Ct. Cl. 956
Volume: 59
Reporter: United States Court of Claims Reports
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: GUARANTY TITLE & TRUST CORPORATION, RECEIVER, VUE DE L'EAU COMPANY, v. THE UNITED STATES
Judges: 
Pages: 956–956

Head Matter:
GUARANTY TITLE & TRUST CORPORATION, RECEIVER, VUE DE L'EAU COMPANY, v. THE UNITED STATES
[57 C. Cls. 620; 264 U. S. 200]
Judgment was rendered against the plaintiff (inter-venor) in the court below. On appeal the judgment was affirmed, and the Supreme Court decided:
Under the Virginia Code, 1919, sec. 5805, providing that no person shall make an entry on, or bring action to recover, any land lying east of the Allegheny Mountains, but within 15 years next after the time when the right to do so first accrued to himself or to some person through whom he claims, adverse possession for the required period not only bars the owner’s right of entry or action but vests title in the disseisor.
The disseisor need not have a deed or writing giving color of title or furnishing foundation for belief or claim of ownership or legal right to enter and take possession; his intention to appropriate and use the land as his own to the exclusion of all others suffices.
Acts sufficient to apprise everyone of exclusive occupation and use, with unequivocal, emphatic, and public assertion of ownership, held to have met the requirements of the Virginia law governing title by adverse possession.
Where one of two rival claimants in the Court of Claims was rightly awarded the judgment, but payment of the, money subsequently appropriatd by Congress was withheld because of an appeal taken by the other in which the former intervened as appellee, this court, in affirming the judgment, required the appellant to pay the successful claimant costs and interest on the judgment from the date of the appropriation until funds should be available for payment of the judgment by the United States.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Butler
delivered tbe opinion of the Supreme Court February 18, 1924.