Ewing v. Burnet
United States Supreme Court
36 U.S. 41 (1837)
In 1824, James Ewing (plaintiff) inherited from Samuel Williams the title to a vacant lot in Cincinnati. The lot was across the street from the home of Jacob Burnet (defendant), who had claimed ownership of it since 1803. Burnet dug sand and gravel from the lot, allowed some others to dig and denied some others permission to dig, and leased the lot for the purpose of digging sand and gravel. Burnet also paid taxes on the lot from 1810 to 1834. Ewing brought an action in ejectment in federal district court to recover possession of the lot. The relevant state statute required actions in ejectment be brought within 21 years of the date that the cause of action accrued. The jury determined that Burnet had acquired the property by adverse possession. Ewing appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Baldwin, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 706,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 706,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,400 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.