Keith v. Cheeny
Oregon Supreme Court
Error to Multnomah. Tms action is to recover the possession of a town or building lot situate in the city of Portland, and county of Multnomah. The cause was tried at the March term, 1860, of the Circuit Court of Multnomah County.
1Opinion of the CourtBoise, J.
The plaintiff in the court below declared as tenant in fee; and the defendant, in his answer, also claimed to be tenant in fee.
On the trial, the plaintiff (Cheeny) offered in evidence a *286deed to the premises from William W. Chapman and wife, and also three other paper writings ; one, a donation certificate issued to said Chapman and wife; one, a certificate stating that said Chapman had paid at the land office one dollar and a quarter per acre for the land described in said donation certificate; the other, a receipt for said money so paid; each of these papers purported to be copies of papers…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Willamette Falls Canal & Lock Co. v. GordonOregon Supreme Court · 1876
- Tyee Consolidated Mining Co. v. LangstedtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1905
- Weatherford v. McKayOregon Supreme Court · 1911
- Feehely v. RogersOregon Supreme Court · 1938
- Morrow v. Warner Valley Stock Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1909