Legal Opinion

Brown v. Brown

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided January 4, 1941PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHays, J.

In this action respondents (plaintiffs below) seek to partition certain real estate in New Madrid County. Plaintiffs claim interest in the land involved as heirs at law of George H. Hancock, deceased. Appellant Bertha Conyers was not originally a party, but sought and was granted leave to intervene. In her intervening petition and the answer which she filed she sets up a claim to an undivided one-half interest in a portion of the lands, partition of which is sought by the plaintiffs, basing her claim upon a quitclaim deed from Mary Elizabeth Hancock, now deceased, widow of George H. Hancock.…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Kirk v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  2. Burke v. AdamsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
  3. Grafeman Dairy Co. v. Northwestern BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1921
  4. Castleman v. CastlemanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
  5. Rhoads v. RhoadsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1938

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Emery v. Brown Shoe CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
  2. STATE EX INF. VOIGTS, ETC. v. City of Pleasant ValleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1970
  3. United Finance Plan v. Parkview DrugsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1952
  4. Rodgers v. Seidlitz Paint and Varnish CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1966
  5. Mills v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1954

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API