Myrick v. Coursalle

Decision Date09 June 1884
Citation19 N.W. 736,32 Minn. 153
PartiesRebecca E. Myrick v. Joseph Coursalle and others
CourtMinnesota Supreme Court

Action under Gen. St. 1878, c. 75, § 2, to determine adverse claims to vacant and unoccupied real property, the defendants, in their several answers, denying plaintiff's title, and each alleging title in himself to a part of the land; the defendant Engerud asking judgment that plaintiff take nothing by the action, and for costs; and the defendant Matilda Shillock asking judgment that plaintiff have no interest in the property, that her title be confirmed as against plaintiff, and for general relief. The action was sent to a referee to report the facts, and was thereafter heard in the district court for Otter Tail county, before McKelvy, J., who held that plaintiff had no interest in the property, and that the defendants named were the owners in fee of the parcels claimed by them respectively. Judgment was entered accordingly, and the plaintiff appealed.

Judgment affirmed.

C. D Kerr and Tyler & Lewis, for appellant.

Defendant Engerud not asking affirmative relief, it was error to give him such in the judgment. Castner v. Gunther, 6 Minn. 63, (119.) Defendant Matilda Shillock alleges a counterclaim, and the question to be tried, so far as she was concerned, was the validity of her title. She must stand or fall on the strength of her own title, and not on the weakness of her adversary's. Moreover, she must set out fully the nature and character of her adverse claim. Walton v. Perkins, 28 Minn. 413; Eastman v Linn, 20 Minn. 387, (433;) Barber v. Evans, 27 Minn. 92; Hooper v. Henry, 31 Minn. 264.

(Counsel also argued that upon the facts found defendants had no title.)

E. E Corliss and Howe Paige for respondents.

OPINION

Berry, J.

In the action given by the statute for the determination of adverse claims to "vacant and unoccupied" land, the plaintiff must allege in his complaint, and in case of contest show upon the trial, some title to the land otherwise he does not put himself in a position to attack any claim of any other person to the same. Walton v. Perkins, 28 Minn. 413, 10 N.W. 424. In the present action, which is of the description mentioned, the only finding in reference to any title of plaintiff is that a guardian of certain minors, "having been licensed to sell all the land in dispute in this case" by a probate court, etc., "did sell to the plaintiff * * * all the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT