Stallings v. Ruby's Lessee

Crain, J., delivered the opinion of this Court. The record in this case presents for our consideration the correctness of a single instruction given by the Circuit Court at the instance of the plaintiff, the present appellee. Thomas Ruby being seized in fee of a tract of land called “ Trouble,” lying and being in Allegany County, containing ninety-six acres, on the 20th of April, 1846, procured from the Land Office a special warrant to resurvey it, with leave to add anj vacant land thereto contiguous, and to reduce the whole into one entire tract. In virtue of this warrant, Benjamin Brown, the surveyor of Allegany County, on the third day of June, 1846, •returned his certificate to the Land Office, certifying that he had carefully surveyed for Thomas Ruby, the tract of ¹⁵⁵ land called “Trouble,” and found it to contain 96§ acres, to which he had added one piece of contiguous vacancy containing 37| acres, and reduced the whole into one tract containing 133-J acres, to be held by the name of “ Rye-field.” After this certificate was made, Thomas Ruby, under his hand and seal, on the 3d day of March, 1851, transferred, assigned and made over to John Ruby, the appellee, all his right, title, interest and estate in and to the land mentioned in said certificate, and desired a patent to be issued for the same.

This assignment operated to give John Ruby an equitable estate in all the real estate included in the certificate. This assig’nment on the certificate being returned to the Land Office by John Ruby, he stood before the Chancellor as the party having the equitable title, praying a conveyance by the State, as trustee of the legal title, with the consent of the assignor. As a patent was granted to him, we must assume that it was done in accordance with well established rules and regulations of the Land Office, of which Courts of justice will take notice; for, considering it as a Court of record, Chancellor Bland says, “it has, like all Courts of common law or equity of that description, the power to regulate its own practice and proceeding, which regulations become the law of the Court, and of the case also so far as they apply.” 1 Bland, 315 ; 2 H. & J., 151 ; Landholder’s Assistant, 434, 442, 461. Having issued from a Court of competent jurisdiction, it is conclusive of all the facts stated in it, and cannot be reviewed collaterally.

As soon as the patent issued, John Ruby, the grantee, was invested with a fee simple estate in all the estate mentioned in it. 1 H. & McH., 93 . Having thus obtained a fee simple in all the estate included in the certificate on which the patent issued, called “Ryefield,” he obtained by the patent the original tract called “ Trouble,” the assignment of Thomas Ruby having operated as a surrender to the State of all his title ¹⁵⁶ to “Trouble,” which, enabled the State to grant a fee simple title in the whole to John Ruby by the