Tiernan v. Beam
Ohio Supreme Court
This cause was reserved for decision here by the Supreme Court -.sitting in Richland county. It was argued by The case is fully stated, and the arguments of counsel noticed in the opinion of the court by Judge Burnet. It is, therefore, deemed unnecessary to swell the report by inserting more than .that opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
'Opinion of the court, by
Judge Burnet :
There is some contradiction in the testimony, and some inconsistency in the statements of a part of the witnesses, but the leading facts on which the case must depend are sufficiently ascertained. The bill, answers, and exhibits show that in 1811 Newman sold to the defendant, Beam, five quarter sections of land, containing eight hundred acres, at four dollars and fifty cent's per acre, amounting to four thousand four hundred dollars. For two of these quarter sections Newman had obtained a patent. The remaining three •had not been paid for, in full, to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In re ClohertyWashington Supreme Court · 1891
- Green v. HartNew York Supreme Court · 1806
- Garson v. GreenNew York Court of Chancery · 1814
- Cox v. FenwickCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1813
3Cited by1 opinion
- Grant v. Administrator of LudlowOhio Supreme Court · 1857