Legal Opinion

Massee v. Schiller

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 27, 1967No. 5-4337Published

1Dissent · FoglemanJohn A. Fogleman, Justice

I respectfully dissent. I cannot understand how either the trial court or the majority of this court arrives at a result which permits or approves the action of appellees in erecting a new boundary fence south of the easement of appellants. I agree that a review of the first appeal1 in this ease is essential to an understanding of-the issue involved here. I do not agree with the majority’s analysis of facts in that case. Then, appellants sought, among other things, a decree:

1. Quieting their title against all claims of appel-lees to a 20-foot lane across the entire width of the NE¼ SE¼ of…

Also in this document: Dissent · Byrd.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Craig v. O'BRYANSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1957
  2. Brooks v. ReedySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1966
  3. Nelms v. SteelhammerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1955
  4. Lusby v. HerndonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1962
  5. Massee v. SchillerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1964

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API