WRIT OF INQUIRY-When necessary for As- | WRIT OF RIGHT — continued. sessment of Damages. See DAMAGES, 53 et seq. WRIT OF RIGHT Joinder Pleading Evidence-Judgment.] Several tenants claiming distinct parcels by different titles cannot be joined in a writ of right. Green v. Liter, 8 Cranch, 229; Liter v. Green, 2 Wheat. 306. 2. If, however, they are so joined, it is matter of abatement only that they hold severally; and if they plead in bar, they admit their joint seisin. Liter v. Green, 2 Wheat. 306. 3. Joining the mise in a writ of right is an admission that the defendants are jointly tenants of the whole freehold. Green v. Liter, 8 Cranch, 229. 4. By the Virginia statute of 1786, reforming proceedings on writs of right, the tenant was not precluded from pleading in abatement as at com. mon law, nor from pleading specially in bar. 1b. 5. The Kentucky statute requiring that when several tenements are demanded in a writ of right, the contents, situation, and boundaries of each shall be stated, did not change the commonlaw rule as to the joinder of parties defendant. Liter v. Green, 2 Wheat. 306. 6. At common law, a writ of right will not lie except against the tenant of the freehold demanded. Green v. Liter, 8 Cranch, 229. 7. A seisin in deed, in contradistinction to a seisin in law, is necessary to maintain a writ of right; but such a seisin may exist, in intendment of law, without an actual entry or a taking of esplees. Ib. 8. Under the statute of uses, an entry is not necessary to complete title. Ib. 9. A writ of right brings into controversy the rights of the parties only. Ib.; Green v. Watkins, 7 Wheat 27. To such writ a better outstanding title in a third person is no defence. Green v. Liter, 8 Cranch, 229. which he has no privity, if it be consistent with all the facts necessary to the demandant's case. Green v. Watkins, 7 Wheat. 27. be 11. But if such title be inconsistent with any fact necessary to be proved by the demandant to maintain his title as against the tenant, it may proved. Thus, if the demandant rely for proof of seisin only on a patent, which gives constructive seisin, the tenant may prove an earlier patent to third person. Ib. And see Inglis v. Sailors' Snug Harbor, 3 Pet. 99. a 12. On trial of a writ of right it is erroneous to exclude competent evidence of title on the ground that if admitted it will not prove that the until it is admitted it cannot be compared with demandant has more mere right than the tenant; the evidence of the tenant, and it cannot be known who has the better right. [BALDWIN, J., dissenting. Bradstreet v. Thomas, 12 Pet. 174. 13. The demandant may recover an undivided part of the land under a count for the whole. Inglis v. Sailors' Snug Harbor, 3 Pet. 99. 14. If judgment on a writ of right be for the demandant against all the several tenants, it may be joint as to costs as well as to the land, although the tenants had pleaded severally. Liter v. Green, 2 Wheat, 306. Circuit Court in Massachusetts still has Jurisdiction of Writs of Right. JURISDICTION, 39. See CIRCUIT COURT Jurisdiction of Circuit Court. See CIRCUIT COURT-JURISDICTION, 5. Limitation Cumulative Disabilities. See LIMITATION EXCEPTIONS AND INTERRUPTIONS, 63. Pleading-What amounts to General Issue. See PLEADING PLEA TO MERITS, 17. Sufficiency of Verdict. See TRIAL-TRIAL BY JURY, 102. · Construction of Treaty with. See TREATY, 40. 10. The tenant in a writ of right cannot intro-WURTEMBERG duce evidence of a title in a third person with Y. YOSEMITE VALLEY — Pre-emption of Land there. | YOSEMITE VALLEY See LANDS OF UNITED STATES PRE- Term of Office of Commissioners to manage. See CALIFORNIA. IN the tabulation of cases the plan followed in the best Reports and in the United States and the Massachusetts Digests has been adopted. Ordinal numbers have been discarded; titles of office such as "Commissioner" and "Supervisor," and the general words "Bank," "Railroad," etc., have been ignored so far as possible; and the distinctive word in the name of the plaintiff has been made the indexical word. Cases known in the reports under general names, like the Legal Tender Cases, will be found under those names and also under the names of plaintiffs. A. 1918 1500 90, 1816 2009 2010 580 978 112 1771 780, 1800 Abbotsford, The (98 U. S. 440) 135, 407 | Agawam Woollen Co. v. Jordan (7 Wal. Abbott v. Essex Co. (18 How. 202) 630, 635 583) 1516, 1519, 1525, 1527, 1528, 1533 Abercrombie v. Dupuis (1 Cranch, 343) 369 Ager v. Murray (105 U. S. 126) Ableman v. Booth (21 How. 506) 563, 649, 777, Agricultural Bank v. Rice (4 How. 225) 790, 970, 973, 1767, 1934 Agricultural Co. v. Pierce County (6 Wal. Achison v. Huddleson (12 How. 293) 1863 246) Ackley School District v. Hall (106 Ú. S. 428) 114 — v. Hall (113 U. S. 135) 1414, 1798 Active, The, v. United States (7 Cranch, 100) 702, 1759 1182, 1260, 1571 Adam v. Norris (103 U. S. 591) Ahl v. Johnson (20 How. 511) 1196, 1212 409, 415 Alabama, The (92 U. S. 695) 1781 911 Alabama State Bank v. Dalton (9 How. 150 1451 355 981 666 308 300, 307 55 v. Brown (1 Pet. 683) 273, 274, 275, 1818 v. Bryan (110 U. S. 414) 1045, 1048 941 1301, 1306 75 v. Harris (4 Cranch, 299) 1152, 1586, 1707 Adriatic, The (107 U. S. 512) 407 v. Pendleton (8 Cranch, 462) 1286, 1290, 1311, Adriatic Fire Insurance Co. v. Treadwell 1630 American Emigrant Co. v. Adams County (100 U. S. 61) Anna Maria, The (2 Wheat. 327) Anne, The (3 Wheat. 435) 311, 1716 298, 307, 461, 1621, 469, 922, 1250, 1933 1980 1157 1157, 1158 238, 20 1503, 1542, 1554 120 1632, 1687, 1690, 1694 v. Wright County (97 U. S. 339) . Wright County (100 U. S. 61) American File Co. v. Garrett (110 U. S. 288) 539, 752 American Fur Co. v. United States (2 Pet. 358) 49, 839, 990, 1803 American Insurance Co. v. Canter (1 Pet. 511) 18, 1872, 1874, 1935, 1979 American Life Insurance Co. r. Mahone (21 Wal. 152) 839, 1015, 1035 American Printing House v. Louisiana Board of Trustees (104 U. S. 711) American Steamboat Co. v. Chase (16 Wal. 522) American Wood-Paper Co. v. Fibre Disin- Ames v. Kansas (111 U. S. 449) Antelope, The (12 Wheat. 546) Anthony v. Butler (13 Pet 423) v. County of Jasper (101 U. S. 693) 1394 Antoni v. Greenhow (107 U. S. 769) 490 342 Antonia Johanna, The (1 Wheat. 159) 1342, 1763, 1951 348, 1490 310 Apollon, The (9 Wheat. 362) 311, 683, 1103, 1440, 1739, 1759 Appleton v. Bacon (2 Black, 699) 1527 Arcambel v. Wiseman (3 Dal. 306) 596 Archer v. Deneale (1 Pet. 585) 637 1199 306 510, 1912 | Atkins v. Fibre Disintegrating Co. (18 Wal. Armstrong v. Toler (11 Wheat. 258) v. Davies (96 U. S. 135) v. Unkart (96 U. S. 118) 662 Atkinson v. Cummins (9 How. 479) 202) 671 Atlanta, The (3 Wal. 425) 673 Atlantic & Gulf Railroad Co. v. Georgia 19, 163 832 1017 1617 929, 1639, 1641 956 727 1058, 1728 469 1546 415 673, 690 Atlantic & Pacific Railroad Co. v. Hopkins 668, 669, 672 672 569 486, 772 668, 673 666 230 208, 524, 525, 551 1418 Aurrecoechea v. Bangs (110 U. S. 217) Avendano v, Gay (8 Wal. 376) v. United States (12 Wal. 304) 195, 810 Barnes v. Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Co (17 Wal. 294) v. Papin (19 How. 342) Ballard v. Thomas (19 How. 382) Ballard Paving Co. v. Mulford (100 U. S. 147) 1078 141, 152 1451 -v. Williams (11 Wheat. 415) Barnet v. Muncie National Bank (98 U. S. 555) Barney v. Baltimore (6 Wal. 280) v. Dolph (97 U. S. 652) v. Keokuk (94 U. S. 324) v. Latham (103 U. S. 205) v. Saunders (16 How. 535) v. Schmeider (9 Wal. 248) v. Watson (92 U. S. 449) Barnitz v. Casey (7 Cranch, 456) Barr v. Gratz (4 Wheat. 213) 697, 144, 357, 365, 740, 1485 1251 993, 1987, 1988 1696 890, 1928, 1929 669, 854, 1906 690 626, 634, 1868 806, 816, 1285, 1287, 1463, 1925 Baltimore, The (8 Wall. 377) Baltimore v. Baltimore & Ohio 413, 547, 1048 Railroad Barrel v. Transportation Co. (3 Wal. 424) 70 Barrett v. Failing (111 U. S. 523) 655, 658 (106 U. S. 5) 90 Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., Ex parte (108 U. S. 566) 1327 Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. Harris v. Holmes (102 U. S. 651) Barribeau v. Brant (17 How. 43) Barron v. Baltimore (7 Pet. 243) Barrow v. Hill (13 How. 54) v. Hunton (99 U. S. 80) v. Reab (9 How. 366) Barrows v. Kindred (4 Wal. 399) Barry, Ex parte (2 How. 65) v. Coombe (1 Pet. 640) v. Foyles (1 Pet. 311) v. Gamble (3 How. 32) v. Mercein (5 How. 103) v. Mercien (4 How. 574) Bartemeyer v. Iowa (18 Wal. 129) Barth v. Clise (12 Wal. 400) Bartholow v. Bean (18 Wal. 635) v. Trustees (105 U. S. 6) Bartle v. Coleman (6 Wheat. 475) 832, 945, 1966 839, 1574, 1577 1178, 1257 1817, 1818 1827 149, 380 147, 970 231 921, 1849 15 706 154, 463 1695 127, 1057 691 972 Church (19 Wal. 62) 1822 331 U. S. 127) 106 204, 205 v. Trook (100 U. S. 112) 1823 Baltimore & Susquehanna Railroad Co. v. Nesbit (10 How. 395) 516 Bank of Commerce v. New York (2 Black, 620) 1862 Bartmeyer v. Iowa (14 Wal. 26) Barton v. Barbour (104 U. S. 126) 771 1667 r. Tennessee (104 U. S. 498) 1866 v. Forsyth (20 How. 532) 863, 865, 1100 Bank Tax Case (2 Wal. 200) 1862 v. Forsyth (5 Wal. 190) 77, 98 Banking Association v. Insurance Associa v. Petit (7 Cranch, 194) 14, 1126 v. Petit (7 Cranch, 288) 336, 941 Banks v. New York (7 Wal. 16) v. Ogden (2 Wal. 57) 240, 604, 610, Bantz v. Frantz (105 U. S. 160) Baptist Association v. Hart (4 Wheat. 1) 338, 341 Barbarie v. Eslava (9 How. 421) -v. Mobile (9 How. 451) Barber v. Barber (21 How. 582) 353, 655, 905, 982 v. Schell (107 U. S 617) 392, 675 Barbier v. Connolly (113 U. S. 27) 796, 1438, 1439 Barbour v. Priest (103 U. S. 293) 228 Barclay v. Howell (6 Pet. 498) 291, 604, 696 Baring v. Dabney (19 Wal. 1) 1786, 1918 611, 1989 1529, 1553 782, 1232 791, 1232 v. Equitable Insurance Co. (10 Wal. 1435 668, 683 33) 1022 v. Gibson (7 How. 650) v. Kellogg (10 Wal. 383) Barnes v. District of Columbia (91 U. S. 540) 95 1723 1431 1391, 1409 v. Harrisburg & Mount Joy & Lancaster Railroad Co. (17 Wal. 294) 1078 v. Winters (112 U. S. 325) 1388, 1391 Batesville Institute v. Kauffman (18 Wal. 151) 178, 743, 1297, 1923 Bath County v. Amy (13 Wal. 244) 1319 |