COLOR OF TITLE. In Ejectment. An apparent title to land founded upon a writ ten instrument, such as a deed, levy of exe cution, decree of court, or the like. 3 Wait, Act. & Def. 17; Brooks v. Bruyn, 35 Ill. 394; Torrey v. Forbes, 94 Ala. 135, 10 South. 320. Color of title, for the purpose of adverse possession under the statute of limitations, is that which has the semblance or appear ance of title, legal or equitable, but which, in fact, is no title; Sharp v. Furnace Co., 100 Va. 27, 40 S. E. 103 ; that which is a title in appearance, but not in reality ; Wood v. Conrad, 2 S. D. 334, 50 N. W. 95 ; Dickens v. Barnes, 79 N. C. 490; Cameron v. U. S., 148 U. S. 301, 13 Sup. Ct. 595, 37 L. Ed. 459; Lindt v. Uihlein, 116 Ia. 48, 89 N. W. 214 ; an apparent right ; Newlin v. Rogers, 6 Kan. App. 910, 51 Pac. 315 ; a title prima facie good; Farley .v. Smith, 39 Ala. 38; Converse v. R. Co., 195 III. 204, 62 N. E. 887.
A writing upon its face professing to pass title, but which does not do so, either from a want of title in the person making it, or from the defective conveyance used; a title that is imperfect, but not so obviously so that it would be apparent to one not skilled in the law ; Williamson v. Tison, 99 Ga. 792, 26 S. E. 766 ; Head v. Phillips, 70 Ark. 432, 68 S. W. 878 ; Bloom v. Straus, 70 Ark. 483, 69 S. W. 549, 72 S. W. 563.
It has been held to be wholly immaterial how imperfect or defective the writing may be, considered as a deed; if it is in writing, and defines the extent of the claim, it is a sign, semblance or claim of title; Street v. collier, 118 Ga. 470, 45 S. E. 294; Mullan's Adm'r v. Carper, 37 W. Va. 215, 16 S. E. 527; that strictly speaking it cannot rest in parol, see Armijo v. Armijo, 4 N. M. (Gild.) 57, 13 Pac. 92.
A state grant of land, included in an older grant, is color of title ; Weaver v. Love, 146 N. C. 414, 59 S. E. 1041; so of a writing signed by the heirs of an owner of lands allotting them to two of their number and relinquishing their own right thereto ; Hen ry v. Brown, 143 Ala. 448, 39 South. 325 ; and a patent, whether good against the sov ereign or void; Bogardus v. Trinity Church, 4 Sandf. Ch. (N. Y.) 633 ; and a record of proceedings in partition ; Lindsay v. Bea man, 128 N. C..189, 38 S. E. 811.
Color of title and claim of right are not synonymous terms ; Herbert v. Hanrick, 16 Ala. 581; "Claim of title" does not neces sarily include "color of title"; Allen v. Mansfield, 108 Mo. 343, 18 S. W. 901. To
constitute color of title, there must be a paper title; but claim of title may rest wholly in parol; Hamilton v. Wright, 30 Ia. 480. It has been held that, to give color of title, a conveyance must describe the property ; Packard v. Moss, 68 Cal. 123, 8 Pac. 818; Wood v. Conrad, 2 S. D. 334, 50 N. W. 95 ; that it must designate a specified interest in the land; Etowah, etc., Mining Co. v. Parker, 73 Ga. 53 ; Wilson v. Johnson, 145 Ind. 40, 38 N. E. 38, 43 N. E. 930.
A tax deed, though void for failure to comply with the statutes, affords color of title; Lantry v. Parker, 37 Neb. 353, 55 N. W. 962 ; City of Chicago v. Middlebrooke, 143 Ill. 265, 32 N. E. 457; Van Gunden v. Iron Co., 52 Fed. 838, 3 C. C. A. 294. To give color, the conveyance, etc., must be good in form, and profess to convey the title and be duly executed; La Frombois v. Jackson, 8 Cow. (N. Y.) 589, 18 Am. Dec. 463; Latta v. Clifford, 47 Fed. 614; Irey v. Markey, 132 Ind. 546, 32 N. E. 309 ; but a deed to a tenant in possession from one who has no title to the land is insufficient as a basis for ad verse possession ; McRoberts v. Bergman, 132 N. Y. 73, 30 N. E. 261. A conveyance void on its face is not sufficient ; Moore v. Brown, 11 How. (U. S.) 424, 13 L. Ed. 751; Marsh v. Weir, 21 Tex. 97. An entry is by color of title when it is made under a bond fide and not pretended claim of title exist ing in another ; McCall v. Meely, 3 Watts (Pa.) 72. A quit-claim deed is sufficient color of title to support a plea of title by limitation ; Parker v. Newberry, 83 Tex. 428, 18 S. W. 815. The deed, or color of title, under which a person takes possession of land, serves to define specifically the bound aries of his claims; Ellicott v. Pearl, 10 Pet. (U. S.) 412, 9 L. Ed. 475. When a disseisor enters upon and cultivates part of a tract, he does not thereby hold possession of the whole tract constructively, unless this entry was by color of title by specific boundaries to the whole tract ; color of title, is val uable only so far as it indicates the extent of the disseisor's claim ; Ege v. Medlar, 82 Pa. 99. See Allen v. Mansfield, 108 Mo. 343, 18 S. W. 901; Sholl v. Coal Co., 139 Ill. 21, 28 N. E. 748. A person taking lands under a judicial sale, though void, has color of title; Irey v. Mater, 134 Ind. 238, 33 N. E. 1018; Mullan's Adm'r v. Carper, 37 W. Va. 215, 16 S. E. 527.
See 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1178, note; AD VERSE POSSESSION.