- (g) Life tenant and remainderman. The statute of limitation does not operate in favor of a tenant for his own or another's life, so long as the life endures, as against the remainderman or reversioner.36 The life tenant is rightfully in possession ana the theory of adverse possession operates only when there is a wrongful possession,34 and it is consequently

29. Little Rock etc. R. Co. v. Rankin, 107 Ark. 487, 156 S. W. 431 (grantee by quitclaim charged with notice). Brown v. Huey, 103 Ga. 448, 30 S. E. 429; Keys v. Mason, 44 Tex. 144.

30. Wingfield v. Davis, 53 Ga. 655; Ripley v. Miller, 165 Mich. 470, 130 N. W. 345 Ann. Cas. 1912C 952; Snow v. Rich, 22 Utah 123, 61 Pac. 336.

31. Tayloe v. Dugger, 66 Ala. 444; Beard v. Ryan, 78 Ala. 37.

32. Robertson v. Wood, 15 Tex. 1, 65 Am. Dec. 140.

33. Washington v. Norwood, 128 Ala. 391, 30 So. 405; Ogden v. Ogden, 60 Ark. 70, 46 Am. St. Rep. 151, 28 S. W. 796; Meacham v. Bunting, 156 111. 586, 28 L. R.

A. 618, 47 Am. St. Rep. 239, 41 N. E. 175; Haskett v. Maxey, 134 Ind. 182, 19 L. R. A. 379; Mixter v. Woodcock, 154 Mass. 535, 28 N. E. 907; Stevens v. Winship, 1 Pick. 318, 11 Am. Dec. 178; Lum-ley v. Haggerty, 110 Mich. 552, 64 Am. St. Rep. 364, 68 N. W. 243; Pincknay v. Burrage, 31 N. J. L. 21; Clute v. New York Cent. & H. R. Co., 120 N. Y. 267, 24 N. E. 317; Ladd v. Byrd, 113 N. Car. 466, 18 S. E. 666; Mccorry v. King, 3 Humph. (Tenn.) 267, 39 Am. Dec. 165; Hannon v. Hounihan, 85 Va. 429, 12 S. E. 157; Titchenell v. Titchenell, 74 W. Va. 237, 81 S. E. 978.

34. See Pickett v. Doe, 74 Ala. 131; Hanson v. Ingwaldson, immaterial that the life tenant asserts a claim to the fee, since this gives the remainderman no right of entry or action.35 Even though the remainderman might, if he chose, assert a forfeiture of the life estate by reason of wrongful acts upon the part of the life tenant. he is, it seems, under no obligation so to do, in order to prevent the running of the statute.36 In one or two states, however, it has been decided that, in view of a statute giving to a reversioner or remainderman the right to institute a proceeding to quiet title, it is incumbent upon the remainderman so to do in case a tenant in life makes a conveyance in fee, and that the statute runs against the remainderman from the time of such conveyance.37

One to whom a tenant for life transfers his estate, whether the conveyance purports to convey a life estate or a fee simple estate, acquires the estate of his grantor, with a like right of possession, and consequently the statute does not run in his favor as against the remainderman, until after the termination of the life.38

77 Minn. 533, 77 Am. St. Rep. 692. 80 N. W. 702.

35. Keith v. Keith, 80 Mo. 125. 125.

36. Wallingford v. Hearl, 15 Mass. 471; Mixter v. Woodcock, 154 Mass. 535, 28 N. E. 907; Moore v. Luce, 29 Pa. 260, 72 Am. Dec. 629; But in Green v. Horn, 207 N. Y. 489, 101 N. E. 430 it is intimated that a "positive act of disclaimer" might render the life tenant's possession adverse.

37. Murray v. Quigley, 119 Iowa, 6, 97 Am. St. Rep. 276, 92 N. W. 869; Garrett v. Olford, 152 Iowa, 265, 132 N. W. 379; Maurer v. Reifschneider, 89 Neb. 673, Ann. Cas. 1912C, 643, 132 N. W. 197; Criswell v. Criswell,

101 Neb. 349, 163 N. W. 197; Contra. Armor v. Frey. 253 Mo. 447, 161 S. W. 829; Dallas Compress Co. v. Smith, 190 Ala. 42:;. 67 So. 289.

38. Winters v. Powell, 180 Ala. 425, 61 So. 96; Edwards v. Bender, 121 Ala. 77, 25 So. 1010; Moore v. Childress, 58 Ark. 610, 25 S. W. 833; Luquire v. Lee, 121 Ga. 624, 49 S. E. 834; Howard v. Henderson, 142 Ga. 1, 82 S. E 292; Maring v. Meeker, 263 til. 136, 105 N. E. 31; Srhroeder v. Bozarth, 224 111. 310, 79 N. B 583; Gates v. Colfax Northern Ry. Co., 177 Iowa, 690, 159 X. W. 456; Carpenter v. Moorelock, 151 Ky. 506, 152 S. W. 576; Mixter v. Woodcock, 154 Mass. 535, 28 N B

2 R. P. - 52

If a tenant pur autre vie retains possession after the death of the cestui que vie. his possession is usually regarded as adverse to the remainderman from that time,39 as would be, it seems, the possession of the representatives of a tenant for life who hold over after the death of the latter.

- (h) Cotenants. As between cotenants, the fact that A is in possession,40 or takes all the rents and profits,41 while B is not in possession and receives none

907; Hauser v. Murray, 256 Mo. 58, 165 S. W. 376; Westmeyer v. Gallenkamp, 154 Mo. 28, 77 Am. St. Rep. 747, 55 S. W. 231; Green v. Horn, 207 N. Y. 489, 101 N. E. 430; Thompson v. Simpson, 128 N. Y. 270, 28 N. E. 627; Smith v. Proctor, 139 N. C 314, 2 L. R. A. N. S. 172, 51 S. E. 889; Cooley v. Lee, 170 N. C. 18, 86 N. E. 720; Carpenter v. Denoon, 29 Ohio St. 379; Rawls v. Johns. 54 S. C. 394, 32 S. E. 451; Chambers v. Chattanooga Union R. Co., 130 Tenn. 459, 171 S. W. S4; Davis v. Tebbs, 81 Va. 600; Mcdowell v. Beckham, 72 Wash. 224, 130 Pac. 350.

39. Mann v. Mann, 141 Cal. 326, 74 Pac. 995; Jones v. Johnson, 81 Ga. 293, 6 S. E. 181; Turner v. Hause. 199 111. 464, 65 N. E. 445; Miller v. Ewing, 6 Cush. (Mass.) 34; Hall v. French. 165 Mo. 430; Barrett v. Stradl. 73 Wis. 3.85. 9 Am. St. Rep. 795, 41 N. W. 439. In Day v. Cochran. 24 Miss. 261 the possession of a tenant pur ant re vie holding over is stated not to be adverse.

Occasionally the cases suggest a distinction between the holding over of one who had never asserted a claim to more than a life estate, and that of one who entered under a conveyance from a life tenant which purported to give him a fee simple estate, the former possession not being regarded as adverse. See Irvine v. Siljbetts, 26 Fa. 477; Bannon v. Brandon, 34 Pa. St. 263, 75 Am. Dec. 655; Gernet v. Lynn, 31 Pa. St. 94; Barrett v. Stradl, 73 Wis. 385. 9 Am. St. Rep. 795, 41 N. W. 439.

That if one has a life estate merely by reason of the omission of words of inheritance, the possession of one to whom he undertakes to convey in fee is adverse to the reversioner after the life tenant's death, see Jackson v. Harsen, 7 Cow. (N. Y.) 323, 17 Am. Dec. 517; Henley v. Wilson, 77 N. Car. 216.