Dawson v. Parham
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from St. Francis Circuit Court.- Hon. M. T. Sanders, Circuit Judge. The deed from Johnson’s administrator to Pool and Dawson was the only missing link in appellant’s title. This is supplied by J. H. Dawson’s testimony. The finding of the court was-contrary to the evidence.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from St. Francis Circuit Court.- Hon. M. T. Sanders, Circuit Judge. The deed from Johnson’s administrator to Pool and Dawson was the only missing link in appellant’s title. This is supplied by J. H. Dawson’s testimony. The finding of the court was-contrary to the evidence. An execution deed is prima facie evidence of Its recitals concerning levy, notice, sale and compliance of the officer with his duties, but it is not and can be no-more evidence of title in the execution defendant than if it did not exist. 16 Ark., 5‡3; 22 Id., p2g; 22 Id., jyp. The presumption of law is, that the…
1Opinion of the Court
Battle J.
H. B. and T. C. Dawson sued John Parham and Anna W. Parham, in 'the St. Francis circuit court, for a-tract of land. They aver, in their complaint, that they are the owners of and entitled to the possession of the land and that defendants hold possession thereof without right, which defendants deny.
The issues of fact ¿rising in the action were, by consent of both parties, tried by the court.
To prove title, plaintiffs introduced as evidence in the trial a. certificate of purchase executed by a land agent of the State of Arkansas on the third day of December, 1853, certifying that G. V.…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Nix v. PfeiferSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Brasher v. TaylorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- Jackson v. GregorySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1945
- Wadly v. LeggittSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Beardsley v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.