Innocent purchaser cannot tack on possession of grantor whose possession originated in fraud.

- An inchoate prescriptive title may be transferred by a possessor to a successor, so that the successive possessions may be tacked to make out the prescription, except that the innocent purchaser may not tack to one's own the possession of a grantor whose possession originated in fraud of the true owner. Fraser v. Dolvin, 199 Ga. 638, 34 S.E.2d 875 (1945).

Evidence sufficient to show ripening of prescriptive title.

- When the evidence conclusively showed that the defendant and the defendant's predecessors in title acquired color of title to the property in dispute and bona fide entered into possession under their respective paper titles under a claim of right, and that the adverse possession of the defendant, together with that of the defendant's predecessors in title, was for about 13 years (more than seven years), the prescriptive title of the defendant thereby ripened, extinguished all inconsistent titles, and became the true title to the property. Fraser v. Dolvin, 199 Ga. 638, 34 S.E.2d 875 (1945).

Cited in Ellis v. Dasher, 101 Ga. 5, 29 S.E. 268 (1897); Bedingfield v. Moye, 143 Ga. 563, 85 S.E. 856 (1915).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 3 Am. Jur. 2d, Adverse Possession, § 76 et seq.

C.J.S.

- 2 C.J.S., Adverse Possession, §§ 163, 207, 208.

ALR.

- Adverse possession: right of remainderman or reversioner to tack his possession to that of life tenant, 150 A.L.R. 557.

Tacking as applied to prescriptive easements, 72 A.L.R.3d 648.