Legal Opinion

Harriman Land Co. v. Hilton

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1908PublishedCited by 8 opinions

FROM MORGAN. Appeal from the Chancery Court of Morgan County. —D. L. Lansdhn, Chancellor.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice McAlister

*310The object of this bill is to recover the possession of a tract of land in Morgan county comprising about 863| acres. It is alleged that the defendants George Hilton, M. N. Schoetz, and others had wrongfully taken possession of said lands and were withholding same from complainant. The bill also prayed for an accounting to ascertain the amount of timber cut by defendants and other damages inflicted upon the premises and for a decree for the value thereof. The defendants filed their joint and separate answers in which they expressly denied that complainant was the owner of the land described…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. The People v. . SnyderNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  2. Darst v. BatesIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Byrd v. PhillipsTennessee Supreme Court · 1907
  4. Raines v. WalkerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1883
  5. Clark v. AkersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Harris v. MorganTennessee Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Schultz v. AndersonTennessee Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Rowe v. HillCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
  4. Watts v. WarnerTennessee Supreme Court · 1924
  5. Kobbe v. Harriman Land Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1917

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

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

Powered by the Exa API