Douglas v. Skelly Oil Co.

17 Citing cases

  1. Cotten v. Cotten

    203 Miss. 316 (Miss. 1948)   Cited 13 times

    Even if the defendants proved by the weight of the evidence that the defendants had title to the land in controversy down to the alleged "line of possession" by reason of more than 10 years adverse occupation and claim thereto, this claim would be broken in continuity and destroyed by a sale of this land to the State by its governmental subdivisions, and since the State held an inchoate title to the entire S 1/2 of N 1/2 of NE 1/4, said Section 23, since September 18, 1932, when it was sold for taxes, and a vested title since the expiration of the time for redemption from such tax sale to the time it sold said land to W.J. Sanders in 1939, all claim of the defendants to any part thereof by adverse possession terminated. Douglas v. Skelly Oil Co., 201 Miss. 23, 28 So.2d 227; Code of 1942, Secs. 9744, 9769, 9935, 9936, 9947, 9957. To establish adverse possession, the burden of proof is on the defendants who allege it.

  2. American Petrofina v. Warren

    247 Miss. 552 (Miss. 1963)   Cited 1 times

    The alleged rights of the appellees are now barred by the Statutes of Limitations appearing as Mississippi Code Annotated 709, 710, 711 and 718. Aultman v. Kelly, 236 Miss. 1, 109 So.2d 344; Carlisle v. Federal Land Bank of New Orleans, 217 Miss. 289, 64 So.2d 142; Douglas v. Skelly Oil Co., 201 Miss. 23, 28 So.2d 227; Gaddis McLaurin, Inc. v. Nichols, 234 Miss. 155, 105 So.2d 259; Gulfport Farm Pasture Co. v. Hancock Bank, 232 Miss. 289, 98 So.2d 862; King v. Childress, 232 Miss. 766, 100 So.2d 578; Neal v. Teat, 240 Miss. 35, 126 So.2d 124; Temples v. First National Bank of Laurel, 239 Miss. 446, 123 So.2d 852; Secs. 709, 710, 711, 718, Code 1942. IV. The appellees are estopped to claim adversely to appellants.

  3. Carlisle, et al. v. Federal Land Bank

    217 Miss. 289 (Miss. 1953)   Cited 9 times

    A. Ouster and evidence of possession. 62 C.J. 430, Sec. 36; Ferguson v. Chancellor, 206 Miss. 519, 40 So.2d 275; Peeples v. Boykin, 132 Miss. 359, 96 So. 177; Jones v. Hoover, 204 Miss. 345, 37 So.2d 490; Boyd v. Entreken, 209 Miss. 51, 45 So.2d 848; Chatman v. Carter, 209 Miss. 16, 45 So.2d 841; Farnsworth v. O'Neal, 158 Miss. 218, 130 So. 101; McCaughn v. Young, 85 Miss. 277, 37 So. 839; Douglas v. Skelly Oil Co., 201 Miss. 23, 28 So.2d 227; Smith v. Anderson, 193 Miss. 161, 8 So.2d 251; Barner v. Lehr, 190 Miss. 77, 199 So. 273; Smith v. Smith, 211 Miss. 481, 52 So.2d 1; Vaughn v. McCool, 186 Miss. 549, 191 So. 286; Wight v. Ingram Day Lbr. Co., 195 Miss. 823, 17 So.2d 196. B. Possession by Federal Land Bank, Lee Chancellor and his heirs perfected title to both surface and minerals and barred any rights of appellants.

  4. Smith v. Smith

    211 Miss. 481 (Miss. 1951)   Cited 63 times

    (c). Continuous adverse possession not broken by temporary changes in actual occupancy. Ford v. Wilson, 35 Miss. 490; Harper, et al. v. Tapley, et ux., 35 Miss. 506; McCaughn v. Young, 85 Miss. 277, 37 So. 839; Douglas, et al. v. Skelly Oil Co., et al., 28 So.2d 227. III. By virtue of the law applicable as set forth under Points I and II, supra, Granberry Smith acquired title for the reason that it was thought and intended by all parties connected with the titles since 1911 to date that whenever the description "Lot 3" was used, that it was thought that the eastern boundary line thereof was the Arbitration or fence line, and despite said fact, or cumulatively with said fact Lot 2 West of the Arbitration Line was inclosed with Lot 3 by a well built, completely surrounding, wire fence, which was maintained undisputably to the date suit was filed.

  5. Walker v. Polk

    208 Miss. 389 (Miss. 1950)   Cited 35 times

    Appellees acquired by adverse possession the title to the land involved in this litigation. Douglas et al. v. Skelly Oil Co. et al., 201 Miss. 23, 28 So.2d 227; Ford v. Wilson, 35 Miss. 490; Harper v. Tapley, 35 Miss. 506; Eastman, Gardiner Co. v. Hinton, 86 Miss. 604, 38 So. 779; Snowden McSweeny Co. v. Hanley, et al., 195 Miss. 682, 16 So.2d 24; McCaughan v. Young, 85 Miss. 277, 37 So. 839; Meyerkort et al. v. Warrington, et. al., 19 So.2d 433; Hanna v. Renfro, 32 Miss. 125; Hamner, et al. v. Yazoo Delta Lbr. Co., 100 Miss. 349, 56 So. 466; Shepherd v. Cox, et al., 191 Miss. 715, 4 So.2d 217, 136 A.L.R. 1346; 2 C.J., Adverse Possession, pp. 188-189, Secs. 362-364, 367, p. 190; Native Lbr. Co. et al. v. Elmer, 117 Miss. 720, 78 So. 703; Jones v. Gaddis, 67 Miss. 761; Bullock, et al. v. Greer, et al., 181 Miss. 190, 179 So. 264; Lindenmayer v. Gunst, et al., 70 Miss. 693, 13 So. 252; Cox v. Richerson, 186 Miss. 576, 191 So. 99; Sec. 2288, Code 1930; Sec. 711, Code 1942; 2 C.J.S., p. 836, Sec. 223; Kersh, et al. v. Lyons, et al., 195 Miss. 598, 15 So.2d 768; Southern Naval Stores Co. v. Price, 30 So.2d 505, and 32 So.2d 575; Moore, et al.

  6. Lippert v. Jung

    366 Md. 221 (Md. 2001)   Cited 58 times
    Recognizing that if an owner of foreclosed property "fails to redeem, the purchaser acquires absolute title to the property"

    In the Mississippi case of Cotten v. Cotten, 203 Miss. 316, 321-22, 35 So.2d 61, 63 (1948), the Court recognized that there might be a difference as to the interruption of the statutory period where the right of redemption has not been foreclosed, an issue we need not reach in the instant case, when it opined as dicta: "It is conceded . . . that there is no previous decision of this Court expressly holding that [a tax sale] has the effect of breaking the continuity of adverse possession where the claimant on such ground continues in possession, but the case of Douglas et al. v. Skelly Oil Company et al., 201 Miss. 23, 28 So.2d 227, 230, is cited holding that: `Moreover, the contention of appellants to the effect that a sale to the State for taxes during two of the years in question had the effect of interrupting the possession is not well taken for the reason that each of the said tax sales were redeemed within the time required by law. . . . In the instant case, the title of the State had matured for failure to redeem, and the statute of limitation could not again begin to run until the land became subject of private ownership in 1938, less than ten years prior to the filing of this suit.

  7. Temples v. First Natl. Bk., Laurel

    239 Miss. 446 (Miss. 1960)   Cited 7 times
    In Temples v. First National Bank of Laurel, 239 Miss. 446, 123 So.2d 852, 125 So.2d 543 (1960), the Court held the running of limitation extinguishes both the note and the deed of trust securing it.

    The First National Bank and its successors in title have established title by adverse possession to all of the land involved in this cause by possession since November 22, 1937 to the date of the filing of this suit. Carlisle v. Federal Land Bank of New Orleans, 217 Miss. 289, 64 So.2d 142; Carter v. Eastman, Gardiner Co., 95 Miss. 651, 48 So. 615; Cook v. Farley, 195 Miss. 638, 15 So.2d 357; Douglas v. Skelly Oil Co., 201 Miss. 23, 28 So.2d 227; Grant v. Montgomery, 193 Miss. 175, 5 So.2d 491; Hammer v. Yazoo Delta Lumber Co., 100 Miss. 349, 56 So. 446; Lykes Bros., Inc. v. McConnel (Fla.), 115 So.2d 606; Merchants Manufacturers Bank v. State, 200 Miss. 291, 25 So.2d 585; Opinion Attorney General, Nov. 1, 1958; Osborne v. Thomas, 221 Miss. 682, 74 So.2d 751; State v. King, 77 W. Va. 37, 87 S.E. 170, L.R.A. 1918E 1044; White v. Merchants Planters Bank, 229 Miss. 35, 90 So.2d 11; Secs. 709, 710, 711, Code 1942; Chaps. 189, 190, Laws 1934; 1 Am. Jur., Sec. 186 pp 895, 896; 2 C.J.S., Secs. 63, 167(a), 168, 170.

  8. York v. Haire

    112 So. 2d 245 (Miss. 1959)   Cited 7 times

    Paul M. Moore, W.J. Evans, Calhoun City, for appellant. I. Cited and discussed the following authorities: Cotten v. Cotten, 203 Miss. 316, 35 So.2d 61; Douglas v. Skelly Oil Co., 201 Miss. 23, 28 So.2d 227; Evans v. Shows, 180 Miss. 518, 177 So. 786; Harlan v. Martin, 200 Miss. 667, 27 So.2d 725; Harris v. Lollar (Miss.), 17 So.2d 325; Kelley v. Welborn, 217 Miss. 16, 63 So.2d 413; Page v. O'Neal, 207 Miss. 350, 42 So.2d 391; Parks v. Simmons (Miss.), 52 So.2d 14; Teasley v. Roberson, 149 Miss. 188, 115 So. 211; Secs. 147, 157, 163, Constitution 1890; Secs. 711, 1075, 1262, 1680, Code 1942; 2 C.J.S., Adverse Possession, Secs. 13, 152(e). W.W. Brown, Calhoun City; Jesse Yancy, Jr., Bruce, for appellees.

  9. Heslep v. Millsaps

    106 So. 2d 374 (Miss. 1958)

    I. Appellant cannot assume that the north line of Section 19 established by Mr. Allen in 1938 was erroneous because the south line was found to be erroneous. II. Even if appellee did not acquire title to the land by deed, he acquired title by adverse possession and his possession was not interrupted by the cutting of the right-of-way by Sibley for Joe Smith. Archer v. Helms, 69 Miss. 730, 11 So. 3; Batson v. Smith, 211 Miss. 428, 51 So.2d 749; Burrows v. Gallup, 32 Conn. 493, 87 Am. Dec. 186; Daniels v. Jordan, 161 Miss. 78, 134 So. 903; Douglas v. Skelly Oil Co., 201 Miss. 23, 28 So.2d 227; Geoghegan v. Krauss, 228 Miss. 231, 87 So.2d 461; Hayes v. Lyon, 192 Miss. 858, 7 So.2d 523; Johnson v. Johnson, 77 P.2d 745; Kornegay v. Montgomery, 194 Miss. 274, 12 So.2d 423; Lambert v. State, 211 Miss. 129, 51 So.2d 201; Lott v. Sebren, 210 Miss. 99, 48 So.2d 626; Mason v. Gaddis Farms, 230 Miss. 666, 93 So.2d 629; Native Lumber Co. v. Elmore, 117 Miss. 720, 78 So. 703; Peabody v. Hewitt, 52 Maine 33, 83 Am. Dec. 486; Snowden McSweeney Co. v. Hanley, 195 Miss. 682, 16 So.2d 24; Wilson v. Russell, 216 Miss. 838, 63 So.2d 240; 1 Am. Jur., Secs. 133, 168-170, 175, 177 pp. 870, 887-890; 8 Am. Jur., Sec. 80 p. 802; 2 C.J.S., Sec. 141 p. 701. III. It was not necessary that the land in dispute come within the calls of appellee's deed. Myers v. Orr, 233 Miss. 498, 102 So.2d 674.

  10. Nichols v. Gaddis McLaurin, Inc.

    222 Miss. 207 (Miss. 1954)   Cited 45 times

    I. Color of title, status, and possession. Douglas v. Skelly Oil Co., 201 Miss. 43, 28 So.2d 227; Downing v. Starnes (Miss.), 35 So.2d 536; Eastman, Gardiner Co. v. Hinton, 86 Miss. 779, 38 So. 779; Ferguson v. Chandler, 206 Miss. 518, 40 So.2d 275; Hammer v. Yazoo Delta Lbr. Co., 100 Miss. 349, 56 So. 466; McDonald v. Roberson, 204 Miss. 737, 38 So. 189; Ryan v. Miss. Valley S.I.R.R. Co., 62 Miss. 162; Shelby v. Rhodes, 105 Miss. 255, 62 So. 232; Walker v. Polk, 208 Miss. 389, 44 So.2d 477; Welborn v. Anderson, 37 Miss. 155. II. Notice of claim.