Jackson ex dem. Loop v. Harrington

The recital 0I a deed in a bond is evidence of the deed, even against the obligee and those claiming under him, especially if he or they introduce it in evidence on their part; and the deedneed not be produced, or its absence accounted for. [1] An outstanding title in a person other than the lessor of the plaintiff in ejectment, is sufficient to defeat his recovery, though the defendant do not claim under that title. And this, it seems, though the title be outstanding in the trustee of the lessor. When a re-conveyance from a trustee will be presumed.

Ejectment, for part of military lot No. 43, in the town of Sempronius, in the county of Cayuga, tried at the c.ir*' cuit in that county, January 23d, 1827, before Throop, C T 1 Judge. On the trial, the plaintiff proved a patent from the state to one Schreeder for the whole lot. He then produced a witness who proved a deed in fee of the same lot from the patentee to C. Loop, the ancestor of the lessors of the. plaintiff, which was lost; By his (the ancestor’s) death, the title would have descended upon the lessors; but the same witness who proved the deed to their ancestor also proved by parol that C. Loop afterwards conveyed the lot to one Jackson, upon an agreement that Jackson should get possession of the land at his own expense, and convey one half to the grantor, C. Loop. A bond from Jackson to C. Loop was also produced and given in evidence reciting the conveyance to Jackson, and that Jackson was to trace the title with all convenient speed, and if in him, by virtue of the deed from *C. Loop, then to re-convey one half. This bond was dated December 30th, 1797. It did not appear whether Jackson ever took possession or not, nor whether he ever did any thing to recover the land. He died many years ago in the state prison. The plaintiff resting his cause on the above proof, the judge nonsuited him, on the ground that he had shown a title out of the lessors of the plaintiff, in Jackson, who was not a lessor.