Legal Opinion

Manifold v. Jones

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 31, 1889No. 13,112PublishedCited by 5 opinions

From the Madison Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Elliott, C. J. —

The complaint of the plaintiff, here the *213appellee, is a complaint in the ordinary form to quiet title. The facts pleaded in the second paragraph of the answer and in the cross-complaint are substantially the same, and we give a synopsis of the facts stated in the answer. The facts pleaded are, in substance, these: Conrad Crossley died the owner in fee of the land in controversy. He left a will containing, among others, these provisions:

“ Item 3d. To my son, Corydon W. Crossley, I give and bequeath the following real estate: The undivided one-half of the southwest quarter of…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Carver v. CarverIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
  2. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. WoodIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Mescall v. TullyIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
  4. Indiana, Bloomington & Western Railway Co. v. AllenIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Wagoner v. WilsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1886

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Markover v. KraussIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Oolitic Stone Co. v. RidgeIndiana Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Preston v. BosworthIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Van Horn v. MercerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1902
  5. State ex rel. Dark v. MannIndiana Court of Appeals · 1909

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API