Margaret C. Fairlie v. Joseph W. Scott

WEST, J. -- This is the second appearance of this case in this Court. On the former writ of error the judgment for defendants was reversed, Scott v. Fairlie, 81 Fla. 438, 446, 89 South. Rep. 128. The issues are stated, the proof recited and controlling principles of law are announced in the opinions filed. The general rule is recognized that the statute of limitations does not begin to run against a reversioner or remainderman until his right of possession accrues. But it has been stated that where there is clear proof of actual knowledge brought home to a reversioner or remainderman of abandonment by a life tenant, as such, of his estate in the property and the acquisitions and assertion of a different title thereto by one in the actual possession thereof adverse and hostile to that of the reversioner or remainderman, the statute of limitations may operate to divest the title of the reversioner or remainderman and vest title in the property to such adverse claimant. See Anderson v. Northrop, 30 Fla. 612, 12 South. Rep. 318; 21 C.J. p974. It is the law of this case. Wilson V. Fridenberg,