Hausmann v. Adams
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Franklin Circuit Court. — Hon. Rudolph Hirzel, Judge. The court having reformed the deed in accordance with defendant’s prayer for affirmative relief, the remaining issues in the case are ' to he considered in the light of this correction, and as if the deed had, in terms, originally embraced the description inserted therein by -the decree of the court. Bliss on Code Pleadings, secs. 348, 349, 350; Barlow v. Elliott, 56 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Franklin Circuit Court. — Hon. Rudolph Hirzel, Judge. The court having reformed the deed in accordance with defendant’s prayer for affirmative relief, the remaining issues in the case are ' to he considered in the light of this correction, and as if the deed had, in terms, originally embraced the description inserted therein by -the decree of the court. Bliss on Code Pleadings, secs. 348, 349, 350; Barlow v. Elliott, 56 Mo. App. 374; Allen v. Logrn, 96 Mo. 591, 597-, Conger v. Parker, 29 Ind. 880; Cramer v. Benton, 60 Barb. 216; Barnes v. McMullins, 78 Mo. 260, loe. cit. 271.…
1Opinion of the CourtRombatjee, P. J.
The defendant sold to the plaintiff several tracts of adjoining land constituting a farm, and executed to him a deed therefor containing the following description: Part survey number 2687, south of railroad, section 24, township 44, range 1 east, containing thirteen and fifty hundredths acres; part survey number 1914, northeast fractional, southwest railroad, section 25, township 44, range 1 east, containing two hundred and sixteen and twenty-five *275hundredths acres; northeast part survey number 733 in section 25, township 44, range 1 east, containing one hundred and forty acres. The lands at…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Wood v. MurphyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1892
- Gray v. TempleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Pierce v. FaunceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1853
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ford v. DelphMissouri Court of Appeals · 1920