Supreme Court of the United States — appointed by Franklin Pierce
Gregg v. Forsyth
Supreme Court of the United States · 1861-03-14 · cited 13×
This case was an ejectment action over a lot in Peoria, Illinois, where the plaintiff claimed title under a 1847 federal patent derived from an 1823 congressional act confirming settler claims, while defendants claimed under an 1838 patent that saved prior rights and asserted adverse possession under Illinois' seven-year statute of limitations. The court reversed the Circuit Court's judgment for the plaintiff. The core reasoning was that the defendants' residence and possession through tenants on the larger patented quarter section extended to the disputed lot (used as a place of business), even after subdivision into lots, satisfying the statute's actual residence requirement without any fiduciary relation created by the patent's saving clause, consistent with Illinois Supreme Court precedent on the same facts.
property
Ballance v. Forsyth
Supreme Court of the United States · 1861-03-14 · cited 8×
This case involves a dispute over land titles in Peoria, Illinois, where the plaintiff sought to enjoin execution of a prior judgment that had been affirmed on writ of error, claiming superior title and defects in the defendants' location and survey under the federal acts of May 1820 and March 1823. The Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court's denial of the injunction. The court reasoned that objections to the relative merits of the legal titles or to the surveys could not be raised in equity after judgment at law, that such survey and location issues fell within the exclusive administrative jurisdiction of the Land Office, and that the plaintiff's patent expressly reserved rights under the 1823 act, making any failure to raise timely objections binding.
propertyprocedurefederal power
Suydam v. Williamson
Supreme Court of the United States · 1861-03-14 · cited 46×
The case was an ejectment action over lots in New York City, with plaintiffs claiming title under the will of Mary Clarke, which placed the Chelsea farm in trust for Thomas B. Clarke during his life and then conveyed it in fee to his living issue at his death. The defendant traced title to conveyances and mortgages executed by Clarke under a series of New York legislative acts from 1814-1817 and chancery court orders that discharged the original trustees, allowed Clarke to act as trustee, and permitted sales or mortgages to pay his debts and support his family. The Supreme Court reversed the Circuit Court's judgment for the plaintiffs, reasoning that federal courts must apply the settled law of New York as interpreted by its own courts on questions of common law and land titles, especially where those interpretations had become established rules of property relied upon by many parties in the state.
propertyfamily lawfederal power
Meehan v. Forsyth
Supreme Court of the United States · 1861-03-14 · cited 12×
This was an ejectment action over a lot in Peoria, Illinois, in which Forsyth claimed title derived from a congressional confirmation of an 1823 French land claim that was surveyed in 1840 and patented in 1847, while the defendants claimed under an 1838 federal patent to a quarter-section that included the lot but contained a saving clause for rights under the 1823 act; the defendants had resided on and cultivated part of the quarter-section for more than seven years and paid taxes on it. The circuit court instructed the jury that the defendants' possession was not adverse because of the saving clause and ruled for the plaintiff. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the 1838 patent conveyed fee-simple title, the saving clause merely protected the United States from warranty claims and did not except the lot from the grant or create any fiduciary duty, and the defendants' possession was therefore adverse so that the Illinois seven-year statute of limitations barred recovery.
property
Foote v. Egery
Supreme Court of the United States · 1861-02-18 · cited 3×
The case involved a dispute over title to several leagues of land in Refugio County, Texas, where the plaintiff asserted ownership based on an 1834 land grant from the Mexican state of Coahuila and Texas to colonists Power and Hewetson, along with subsequent deeds and inheritance transfers. The defendants countered with claims under Texas state grants and statutes of limitations. The court addressed three questions regarding the grant's validity, the nature of a conveyance document, and the ability of U.S. citizens to inherit Texas land in 1836, but resolved the case on the first issue alone. Relying on its prior decision in League v. Egery, the court held that Coahuila and Texas lacked authority to convey land in the coastal leagues without approval from the central Mexican government. This ruling invalidated the plaintiff's title, leading to affirmance of the district court's judgment for the defendants.
property
Kellogg v. Forsyth
Supreme Court of the United States · 1861-02-18 · cited 2×
The case involved a judgment in ejectment recovered against a deceased tenant in possession of land in Illinois federal circuit court. After the tenant's death, his attorney and landlord filed a writ of error in the names of the tenant's heirs to challenge the judgment in the Supreme Court. One heir objected that the writ was unauthorized and sought its dismissal. The court overruled the motion to dismiss, reasoning that Illinois practice permits a landlord who defended the suit in the tenant's name to prosecute a writ of error using the heirs' names when acting in good faith and assuming responsibility for costs, with the option to substitute as defendant upon remand.
propertyprocedure