He testified that some time after the Spanish-American war these defendants entered upon the hacienda without his knowledge or consent that after gaining an entry, they took possession of various parcels of land and constructed houses thereon, and have continued in possession ever since that at first he had tolerated their presence on the hacienda, and had made no attempt to assert his rights of ownership, because of the unsettled conditions of the country that, later on, he demanded rent and made a number of efforts to secure the recognition of his right by amicable arrangements with intruders but that all his proposals for a friendly settlement of his claims had been rejected so that, finally be had been compelled to institute this action. The material evidence submitted by the plaintiff consisted of a duly registered composition title to the hacienda issued in the name of his father a deed of gift of the hacienda to himself, executed by his father in a public instrument and his own testimony as to the identify of the land described in the complaint with the land included in the composition title, and as to the entry upon and possession of various parcels of land, within the boundary lines of this tract, by the defendants. Plaintiff undertook to maintain his action without the aid of counsel and as might be expected, the proceedings in the court below fell into the utmost confusion, and culminated in the dismissal of the complaint upon motion, after the plaintiff had submitted his evidence and above motion, after the plaintiff had submitted his evidence and before any witnesses had been called for the defendants.ĭefendants, in their answer, denied the plaintiff’s allegations of ownership of the lands described in his complaint and set up claim of prescriptive title to the various parcels of land occupied by themselves. In this action plaintiff and appellant seeks to eject some nineteen alleged trespassers, or squatters, from the hacienda described in the complaint. It is an indispensable requisite to the perfection and validity of a gift of real estate that the gift be accepted in a public document and title to real estate does not pass from the donor to the donee by virtue of a deed of gift, until and unless the gift is accepted in a public document and the donor duly notified of its acceptance. Plaintiff may not know, and may have no means of knowing, the precise location and extent of the land claimed by the defendant but if he establishes title to the entire tract in himself, and the and defendant appears to be in possession of any part of the tract and fails to establish extent of the part so occupied may be, the sheriff can levy execution on a judgment for possession in favor of the plaintiff, by expelling the defendant from any part of the property of the plaintiff upon which he may be found.Ĥ.

Proof as to the location and extent of the lands occupied by a trespasser in such cases might well be of vital importance upon a question as to the damages which should be allowed the plaintiff, but it is by no means essential to maintain a judgment for possession.

While it is true that the defendant in an action of ejectment, who sets up a claim of prescriptive title to lands within the boundary lines of the lands claimed by him before judgment can be entered declaring him to be entitled to retain possession of these lands by virtue of his prescriptive title it is not necessary for the plaintiff to establish the precise location and extent of the lands claimed or occupied by the defendant, in order to establish his right to a judgment for possession, provided he shows that the defendant is unlawfully in possession of any part of the tract included in his deeds.ģ. EJECTMENT ADVERSE POSSESSION NECESSITY TO ESTABLISH LOCATION AND EXTENT OF LAND CLAIMED BY DEFENDANT. The burden of a claim of prescriptive title to lands included within a registered grant of lands from the Spanish sovereign, rests upon him who asserts.Ģ.

Thessa abellara glendale