Howard v. Perrin

Background

A landowner (the plaintiff, now appellee) sought to recover possession of a tract that had not yet received a formal patent (official federal deed). The defendant (appellant) relied on a two-year territorial statute for people who occupy land by possession, and also filed a cross-claim saying he had a prior right to water found after digging a well. The land at issue was within limits granted to a railroad-related company when the railroad was completed.

Reasoning

The Court examined whether the plaintiff’s title — shown by certified General Land Office records and other evidence — was enough to support recovery even without a patent. The Court held that the certified records were competent and that nothing shown was prejudicial or proved the land was in an excepted class (like mineral land). The Court explained that the two-year territorial possession rule applies only to disputes between mere possessors and does not overthrow a full legal or equitable title that has passed from the United States. On the water claim, the Court accepted the factual finding that only percolating water existed under the soil, and therefore it was not a “river, creek or stream of running water” that the territorial water statutes cover.

Real world impact

The decision lets a landholder with a federal grant record prevail over a short-term occupant relying on a possessory statute, and it prevents claiming percolating subterranean water as a public running stream. The Arizona Supreme Court’s judgment in favor of the recovering landowner is affirmed.