Bowers v. Keesecher
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Dubuque District Court. In Chancery. The material facts are stated in the opinion of the court. contended that the bill is not multifarious.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Dubuque District Court. In Chancery. The material facts are stated in the opinion of the court. contended that the bill is not multifarious. The plaintiffs are heirs of George Lamb Bowers, and as such claim the lots in controversy against the defendants, who, as the bill sets forth, derive their claims to the lots, also from the said George Lamb Bowers, through deeds made by Edwin H. Snow, as administrator of his estate, which deeds, it is charged, are wholly void for want of right, or power, in the administrator to make them, or to sell the lots. Gaines v. Chew, et al, 2 How. S.…
1Opinion of the CourtStockton, J.
The complainants claim as the heirs at law of George Lamb Bowers, who they allege was entitled to pre-emptions to lots No. 209, 443a, 524a, and 539a, and to the undivided half of lots 422 and 423, in the town of Dubuque, under the acts of Congress of July 2,1836, and March 3, 1837, for laying out of the said town; that he proved up his rights of pre-emption to said lots before the commissioners, under said acts of Congress, and obtained certificates of pre-emption thereto; that in December, 1858, the said George Lamb Bowers, departed this life, and Edwin PI. Snow was appointed his…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pierson v. DavidSupreme Court of Iowa · 1855
- Bugbee v. SargentSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1843
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. Yellow Jacket Silver Mining Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1879
- DeWolf v. A. & W. Sprague Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1881
- Hulbert v. Detroit Cycle Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Bowers v. KeeseckerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862