JOHN JENKINS, APPELLANT,
v.
MAXWELL LAND GRANT COMPANY

U.S. | 1914-11-09
No. 57
235 U.S. 691 Supreme Court of the United States (1914) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of Gildersleeve v. New Mexico Mining Co., 161 U. S. 573; Harrison v. Perea, 168 U. S. 311, 323; Wm. W. Bierce, Ltd., v. Hutchins, 205 U. S. 340, 344, and cause remanded to the Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • PAN Am. Petroleum Corp. v. Manuelita Candelaria, 403 F.2d 351 (10th Cir. 1968)
    …necessary to constitute adverse possession, namely, actual, visible, exclusive, hostile, and continuous possession, is lacking, then no title by adverse possession can ripen. Jenkins v. Maxwell Land Grant Co., 15 N.M. 281, 107 P. 739 (1910), aff’d. 235 U.S. 691, 35 S.Ct. 205, 59 L.Ed. 427 (1914). Also see, Merrifield v. Buckner, 41 N.M. 442, 70 P. 2d 896 (1937), and Flores v. Bruesselbach, 149 F. 2d 616 (10th Cir. 1945). The adverse possession statute also specifically requires that the taxes be paid. It i…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw