Ejectment — Burden of proof — Title — Validity of deed — Presumption — Acknowledgment by notary — Evidence — Recording — Burden of proof — Forgery.
1. In an action of ejectment plaintiffs are entitled to recover only on the strength of their own title, not upon the weakness of that of defendant. [589]
2. In an action of ejectment in which it is contended that the deed to defendant is a forgery, from the uncontradicted evidence of a notary that he has a clear recollection of having taken an acknowledgment of grantors to an instrument to defendant and of his original docket of acknowledgments, which shows a deed to have been acknowledged before him by the grantors to the defendant on the date of recording of the deed to defendant, and from the fact of the recording itself, a presumption arises of the validity of the deed in question, the burden of overcoming which rests upon plaintiffs. [588]
Evidence — Production at trial — Rule to produce summary judgment — Ejectment — Deed — Loss — Testimony.
3. In an action of ejectment, summary judgment on a rule by plaintiff that defendant produce upon trial the deed in controversy, is properly refused where the defendant answers, averring loss of the deed, and upon cross-examination by plaintiff of an officer of defendant at the time of trial, the officer testifies that he had searched for the original deed in the files of defendant company, where it ordinarily would have been found, that he there found a certified copy of the deed which had been secured by defendant many years ago, but that he was unable to there find the original. [590]
Evidence — Surviving party — Heirs of decedent — Ejectment against grantee of decedent.
4. In an action of ejectment by plaintiffs, heirs of the deceased grantor, to recover the property in question from defendant, the grantee of decedent, on the ground that the deed to the defendant was a forgery, the plaintiffs are incompetent to testify under the Act of May 23, 1887, P. L. 158.
Judgments — Conclusiveness — Sanity — Judgment in rem.
5. A judgment of sanity entered on a verdict after a proceeding to determine the sanity of a person, is a judgment in rem and is binding on the whole world. [588-9]
Evidence — Presumption — Sanity — Continuance — Judicial decision.
6. Where the soundness of mind of a person is judicially established, the presumption is that his sanity continues until the contrary is shown. [589]
Practice — Trial — Order of proof.
7. The trial court always has the right to regulate the order of proofs. [589]
Argued November 29, 1933.
PER CURIAM, January 2, 1934:
The learned judge of the court below, recently deceased, admirably stated the facts and the law applicable to this case, and the judgment is accordingly affirmed on his opinion.