To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Russell v. Hill

Law Dictionary

Law Dictionary

Featuring Black's Law Dictionary 2nd Ed.
Font size

Property Law Keyed to Cribbet

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Citation. 22 Ill.125 N.C. 470, 34 S.E. 640 (1899)

Brief Fact Summary. The Plaintiff bought timber from McCoy, who had a grant issued by the state as to the land, but the same land had been previously granted to Busbee. Defendant later took the timber from Plaintiff without permission.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. In order to maintain an action in trover, the Plaintiff must show title and possession, or a present right to the possession.

Facts. In 1887, after entry and survey, Busbee, trustee, received a grant, properly registered, from the state for the tract of land at issue. Thereafter, Mrs. McCoy entered and surveyed the same tract of land and also received a grant from the state. Mrs. McCoy had no notice of the grant to Busbee, except for that of the registration of Busbee’s grant implied by the law. Thereafter, Mrs. McCoy sold timber to Plaintiff, who then cut the timber and carried the logs to the Nantahalla River for the purpose of floating the logs to the Asheville Furniture Company. While the logs were situated on the bank of the river, the Defendant came and took them away and sold them to the Asheville Lumber Company for $686.84. The Defendants had no right to title or possession from anyone, including Plaintiff. The Asheville Lumber Company is insolvent and the lower court found that Plaintiff could not recover. Plaintiff appealed.

Issue. May Plaintiff maintain a trover action against Defendant for interference with any right of possession of Plaintiff?
See More Course Videos

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following