Summary
In Hanks v. Tucker, 3 N.C. 147, the party had been in possession forty years. It is prima facie evidence for a jury; and I cannot think a new trial should be granted because the jury found a verdict against evidence on this point of the case.
Summary of this case from Fitzrandolph v. NormanOpinion
(Fall Riding, 1801.)
A jury may presume a grant from length of possession.
IN this case the defendant could not produce a deed or patent, or other colorable title, but proved possession for forty years under marked lines, with some other circumstances, such as the reputation in the neighborhood for a long time back that the lands were the defendant's, and an acknowledgment on the part of the plaintiff that they (148) were covered by patent.
Under the act of 1715, or of 1791, possession of itself will give no title to the possessor; but an uniform possession for forty years under circumstances which convince the jury that a grant once existed is a ground for them to go upon in saying there was a grant. If the jury in the present instance are satisfied from the evidence laid before them that a grant did exist, they will find for the defendant.
Verdict for the defendant.
NOTE. — See Dudley v. Strange, ante, 12, and the note thereto.
Cited: Reed v. Earnhart, 32 N.C. 528.