Overman v. Kerr
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Blaolchawh District Court. This is an action at law by tbe plaintiffs to. recover possession of lot 2 in block 14 in the village of Cedar Falls.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Blaolchawh District Court. This is an action at law by tbe plaintiffs to. recover possession of lot 2 in block 14 in the village of Cedar Falls. The material facts may be compressed, so far as necessary to -understand the questions discussed by counsel and decided by the court, as follows: ■ The legal title is admitted to be in the plaintiffs, unless the deed of June 7.th, 1853, hereinafter alluded to, was delivered.' But, however this may be, the defendant claims an equitable title, arising out of the following facts: On the 22d day of January, 1853, the legislature (see Acts,…
1Opinion of the CourtDilloN, J.
i deed • • delivery. I. The first question which presents itself for decision, is one of fact, viz.: Was the deed of the 7th June> 1853, ever delivered to the commissioners or t0 COunty ? As to the plaintiff, Brown, it is perfectly clear it was never delivered. Defendant scarcely *490contends to the contrary; but with much more plausibility he does insist that the delivery was complete as to the three Overmans, and, if so, the instrument would convey at least an undivided three-fourths of each of the lots embraced in the deed, and among others, the lot in controversy. The Weight of evidence is…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Tucker v. WoodsNew York Supreme Court · 1815
- Hazard v. New England Marine Ins.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1832
- Johnston & Lyon v. FesslerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
3Cited by13 opinions
- Jenkins v. HarrisonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Sheehy v. ScottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- Kopp v. ReiterIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
- Logue v. Von AlmenIllinois Supreme Court · 1941
- Haviland v. HavilandSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.