11 La. Ann. 632 | La. | 1856
It is needless to inquire whether a claim to what is styled an “ improvement ” on public lands will furnish a foundation for the possessory action in ordinary cases.
In this case, the plaintiff alleged himself to be the owner and possessor of the land in question, and the principal defendant is estopped to deny it; for, in an answer to interrogatories propounded to him, he admitted that he leased the land from the plaintiff.
He could not change the character of his own possession from that of lessee to that of owner.
The identity of the tract claimed is admitted by the pleadings.
Judgment affirmed.