Parker v. Burton
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal' from Monroe Circuit Court. — Ho». David H. Eby, Judge. (1) The defendant’s objections to the admission of the deed of dedication of the town of Holliday and' the plat of the town should have been sustained. Neither of these 'papers sufficiently identified the- location of the town or of the lot in question and no parol testimony was introduced to aid (if it could have been aided) the deed and the plat. 4 Am. and Eng.
Read the full summary
Appeal' from Monroe Circuit Court. — Ho». David H. Eby, Judge. (1) The defendant’s objections to the admission of the deed of dedication of the town of Holliday and' the plat of the town should have been sustained. Neither of these 'papers sufficiently identified the- location of the town or of the lot in question and no parol testimony was introduced to aid (if it could have been aided) the deed and the plat. 4 Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, 302 and note 3; Campbell, v. Johnson, 44 Mo. 247;: Hardy v. Mathews, 38 Mo. 121; Yasquez v. Richardson,. 19 Mo. 96; Hogan v. Page, 32 Mo. 79; Holme v.…
1Opinion of the CourtBrace, P. J.
This is an action in ejectment to' recover possession of “the south two-thirds of lot 2 in. *87block 10 in the town of Holliday in Monroe county. ’ ’
The petition is in common form. The answer a general denial. At the close of the plaintiff’s evidence the defendant demurred thereto. The demurrer was overruled, and the issues submitted to the jury without instructions. The verdict was for the plaintiff, and from- the judgment thereon in his favor the defendant appeals.
Plaintiff claims title under a sheriff’s deed dated November 4, 1897, duly executed, acknowledged and recorded, made in pursuance…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Adams v. CowlesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- Wilson v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Harness v. CravensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Schell v. LelandSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- Crossland v. AdmireSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rochford v. BaileySupreme Court of Missouri · 1929
- Evarts v. Missouri Lumber & Mining Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Armold v. LangDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1926
- Cole v. Parker-Washington Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1918