¶1The deceased, Post, was the common source of title to the horse. The plaintiff claimed as the donee of Post, and the defendant as the vendee of Post’s administrators, the same interest. It would seem hardly to admit of doubt that Post’s declarations were evidence against his own title, and that the defendant, who claimed only to have afterwards come in to his right, could not object to it. We think the evidence competent. .The judgment is reversed.
1 Wright 441
Ritchy v. Martin
Decided September 15, 1833
Ohio Supreme Court · decided 1833-09-15
The suit below was trover for a horse. Ritchy, the plaintiff, claimed the horse as a gift from Post, his father in-law. Martin, the defendant, claimed under a purchase from the administrators of Post.
Decided 1833-09-15