Legal Opinion

Healy v. Smith

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided January 6, 1906PublishedCited by 13 opinions

ERROR to the District Court, Sheridan County, Hon. Joseph L. Stotts, Judge. This was an action to enjoin defendants from going with their sheep upon a range claimed by the plaintiffs as a cattle and horse range, and embracing a large body of public lands, and some scattering tracts of private lands, all unenclosed. The facts are stated in the opinion. There was a misjoinder of parties plaintiff, and the demurrer should have been sustained on that ground.

Read the full summary

ERROR to the District Court, Sheridan County, Hon. Joseph L. Stotts, Judge. This was an action to enjoin defendants from going with their sheep upon a range claimed by the plaintiffs as a cattle and horse range, and embracing a large body of public lands, and some scattering tracts of private lands, all unenclosed. The facts are stated in the opinion. There was a misjoinder of parties plaintiff, and the demurrer should have been sustained on that ground. This is an action to prevent trespass upon real estate, and the test as to whether there is a proper joinder' of parties or not is whether…

1Opinion of the Court

Potter, Ci-iirf Justice.

The defendants in error, thirteen in number, joined as plaintiffs in bringing this suit against the present plaintiffs in error and several other parties as defendants, to enjoin alleged threatened trespasses with sheep upon lands alleged to constitute, and for many years to have constituted, the common or joint range and grazing or pasture ground for the cattle and horses owned by the several plaintiffs. As described in the original petition, the lands constituting such range consist of nine entire townships, according to the United States survey, viz: Townships 45,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Buford v. HoutzSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  2. Cosfriff Bros. v. MillerWyoming Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Martin v. Platte Valley Sheep Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Buford v. HoutzUtah Supreme Court · 1888
  5. McGinnis v. FriedmanIdaho Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Rodarte Ex Rel. Rodarte v. City of RivertonWyoming Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Hill v. WinklerNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Kendrick v. HealyWyoming Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Diamond Bar Cattle Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999
  5. Kimple v. SchaferSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913

8 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