Summary
In Vaughan v. Hollingsworth, 35 Idaho 722, at page 731, 208 P. 838, 841, this court quoted with approval from Elder v. McClaskey, 6 Cir., 70 F. 529, 17 C.C.A. 251, as follows: `Before adverse possession by one tenant in common against another can begin, the one in possession must, by acts of the most open and notorious character, clearly show to the world, and to all having occasion to observe the condition and occupancy of the property, that his possession is intended to exclude and does exclude, the rights of his cotenant.
Summary of this case from Flora v. GusmanOpinion
December, 1926.
Order denying defendants' motion to dismiss complaint on the ground that there was another action pending between the parties for the same relief, affirmed, without costs, it appearing that since the entry of the order appealed from the former action has been discontinued. (See Crossman v. Universal Rubber Co., 131 N.Y. 636; Beals v. Cameron, 3 How. Pr. 414; Averill v. Patterson, 10 N.Y. 500.) Kelly, P.J., Jaycox, Young, Kapper and Lazansky, JJ., concur.