Legal Opinion

Houston v. Timmerman

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1889PublishedCited by 36 opinions

Appeal, from. Lirm County.

1Opinion of the CourtLord, J.

This was a suit to partition certain lands described herei.n.,

The defendant denied that the. respondent had any interest in said lands, and alleged that she, was th,e owner in, fee-simple, and, entitled to t,he. possession of- the whole *501of said premises. The plaintiff, in reply, denied this, and alleged affirmatively that, some time in July, 1884, she commenced a suit against A. J. Houston for a divorce and alimony, and for an equal undivided one third of the real property then owned by said Houston, and that be was the owner in fee of said real property which was duly described therein; that…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Eyster v. GaffSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. Murray v. LylburnNew York Court of Chancery · 1817
  3. Winston v. WestfeldtSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
  4. Grant v. BennettIllinois Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Bamford v. BamfordOregon Supreme Court · 1870

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Bray v. LandergrenSupreme Court of Virginia · 1934
  2. Duss v. DussSupreme Court of Florida · 1926
  3. Rodda v. RoddaOregon Supreme Court · 1948
  4. State ex rel. Tolls v. TollsOregon Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Huffman v. HuffmanOregon Supreme Court · 1906

31 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