One is liable in ejectment for the projec tion of his roof over another's land; Murphy v. Bolger, 60 Vt. 723, 15 Atl. 365, 1 L. R. A. 309 ; contra, Rasch v. Noth, 99 Wis. 285, 74 N. W. 820, 40 L. R. A. 577, 67 Am. St. Rep. 858 ; or for the encroachment of the founda tions of a building on the land of another, though entirely below the surface; Wach stein v. Christopher, 128 Ga. 229, 57 S. E. 511; 11 L. R. A. (N. S.) 917, 119 Am. St. Rep. 381; or to secure the removal of wires strung through the air over one's property, though the supports are on adjoining land ; Butler v. Tel. Co., 186 N. Y. 486, 79 N. E. 716, 11 L. R. A. (N. S.) 920, 116 Am. St. Rep. 563, 9 Ann. Cas. 858.
It may be brought upon a right to an es tate in fee-simple, fee-tail, for life, or for years, if only there be a right possession in the plaintiff ; McMillan's Les see v. Robbins, 5 Ohio, 28; Matthews v. Ward. 10 Gill & J. (Md.) 4434-Miller v. Shackleford, 3 Dana (Ky.) 289; Middleton v. Johns, 4 Gratt. (Va.) 129 ; Batterton v. Yoakum, 17 Ill. 288; Sears v. Taylor, 4 Cal 38 ; but the title must be a legal one ; Wright v. Douglass, 3 Barb. (N. Y.) 554; Botts v. Shield's Heirs, 3 Litt. (Ky.) 32; Thompson v. Wheatley, 5 Smedes & M. (Miss.) 499; Middleton v. Johns, 4 Gratt. (Va.) 129 ; Foster v. Mora, 98 U. S. 425, 25 L. Ed. 191; Hollingsworth v. Walker, 98 Ala. 543, 13 South. 6 ; Collins v. Ballow, 72 Tex. 330, 10 S. W. 248; Anson v. Townsend, 73 Cal. 415, 15 Pac. 49 ; Johnson v. Christian, 128 II. S. 374, 9 Sup. Ct. 87, 32 L. Ed. 412 (but in Pennsylvania a valid equitable title will sus tain ejectment, on the ground, as has been said, that there is no court of chancery in that state ; Peebles v. Reading, 8 S. & R. [Pa.] 484; Chase v. Irvin, 87 Pa. 286) ; which existed at the commencement of the suit; Carroll v. Norwood's Heirs, 5 Harr. & J. (Md.) 155; McCulloch v. Cowher, 5 W. & S. (Pa.) 427 ; Pitkin v. Yaw, 13 Ill. 251; Lauris sini v. Doe, 25 Miss. 177, 57 Am. Dec. 200 ; Layman v. Whiting, 20 Barb. (N. Y.) 559; Collins v. Ballow, 72 Tex. 330, 10 S. W. 248 ; Green v. Jordan, 83 Ala. 220, 3 South. 513, 3 Am. St. Rep. pl.; Buxton v. Carter, 11 Mo.
481 (but he cannot recover if the title is terminated pending the,‘ actiou ; Brunson v. Morgan, 86 Ala. 318, 5 South. 495); at the date of the demise ; Anderson v. Turner, 3 A. K. Marsh. (Ky.) 131; Hargrove v. Powell, 19 N. C. 97; Wood v. Morton, 11 Ill. 547 ; Scisson v. McLaws, 12 Ga. 166; Fenn v. Holme, 21 How. (U. S.) 481, 16 L. Ed. 198 ;
and at the time of trial ; Ratcliff v. Trimble, 12 B. Monr. (Ky.) 32 ; Beach v. Beach, 20 Vt. 83; Cresap's Lessees v. Hutson, 9' Gill (Md.) 269; and it must be against the per son having actual possession ; Den v. Ste phens, 18 N. C. 5 ; Den v. Oliver, 10 N. C. 479; McDowell v. King, 4 Dana (Ky.) 67; McDaniel v. Reed, 17 Vt. 674 ; Huff v. Lake, 9 Huruphr. (Tenn.) 137; Hyde v. Folger, 4 McLean 255, Fed. Cas. No. 6,971; Lucas v. Johnson, 8 Barb. (N. Y.) 244; Losee v. Mc } arland, 86 Pa. 33. A railroad company which has condemned lands for railroad pur poses has a sufficient title to sustain an ac tion ; Pittsburgh, Ft. W. & C. Ry. Co. v. Peet, 152' Pa. 488, 25 Atl. 612, 19 L. R. A. 467.
Plaintiff in ejectment may recover as against a mere trespasser, on proof of his former possession only, without regard to his title; Green v. Jordan, 83 Ala. 220, 3 South. 513, 3 Am. St. Rep. 711 ; Wilson v. Fine, 38 Fed. 789; Nolan v. Pelham, 77 Ga. 262, 2 S. E. 639; Ratcliff v. Iron Works Co., 87 Ky. 559, 10 S. W. 365 ; Parker. v. Ry. Co., 71 Tex. 132, 8 S. W. 541; Bradshaw v. Ash ley, 180 U. S. 59, 21 Sup. Ct. 297, 45 L. Ed. 423.
The real plaintiff must recover on the strength of his own title; King v. Mullins, 171 U. S. 404, 18 Sup. Ct. 925, 43 L. Ed. 214'; and cannot rely on the weakness of the de fendant's; 1 East 246; Lane v. Reynard, 2 S. & R. (Pa.) 65; Boardman v. Bartlett, 6 Vt. 631; Den v. Sinnickson, 9 N. J. L. 149; Winton v. Rodger's Lessee, 2 Ov. (Tenn.) 185 ; Hall v. Gittings' Lessee, 2 FL & J. (Md.) 112; Doe v. Ingersoll, 11 Smedes & M. (Miss.) 249, 49 Am. Dec. 57; Clarke v. Diggs, 28 N. C. 159, 44 Am. Dec. 73; Woodworth v. Fulton, 1 Cal. 295 ; Garrett v. Lyle, 27 Ala. 586; Jones v. Lofton, 16 Fla. 189; Holly River Coal Co. v. Howell, 36 W. Va. 489, 15 S. E. 214 ; Dunbar v. Green, 198 U. S. 166, 25 Sup. Ct. 620, 49 L. Ed. 998; and must show an injury which amounts in law to an ouster or dispossession ; Cooley v., Penfield, 1 Vt. 244; Moore v. Gilliam, 5 Munf. (Va.) 346 ; Edwards v. Bishop, 4 N. Y. 61; Lykens v. Whelan, 15 Pa. 483; an entry under a con tract which the defendant has not fulfilled being equivalent; Jackson v. Moncrief, 5 Wend. (N. Y.) 26; Marlin v. Willink, 7 S. & R. (Pa.) 297; Harle v. McCoy, 7 J. J. Marsh. (Ky.) 318, 23 Am. Dec. 407; Dennis v. Ward er, 3 B. Monr. (Ky.) 173; Den v. Westbrook, 15 N. J. L. 371, 29 Am, Dec. 692 ; Baker v. Gittings' Lessee, 16 Ohio 485 ; Prentice v. Wilson, 14 Ill. 91.