McCasland v. Ætna Life Insurance
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Sullivan Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.
complaint of the appellee seeks to reform a deed and to quiet title to the land which the grantor intended to convey.
It is contended by the appellant that the complaint is bad because it shows a mistake of law and not of fact. The mistake is shown to have been in the description of the land intended to be conveyed, and such a mistake, while in some cases one of law, is generally one of fact. The office of a description in a deed is not to identify the land, but to supply the means of identification. Rucker v. Steelman, 73 Ind. 396. Where, therefore, a mistake is made in describing land, it is…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Rucker v. SteelmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
- Conyers v. MericlesIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
3Cited by15 opinions
- Ethridge v. PerrymanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1963
- Moehlenkamp v. ShatzIndiana Court of Appeals · 1979
- McNamee v. RauckIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
- Alfalfa Lumber Co. v. MudgettCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1917
- Keister v. MyersIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.