Harlan v. Ellis

Atkinson, Justice.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The defendant’s amended answer in the nature of a cross-petition averred in part substantially the following: It was the intention of the defendant, and of counsel representing her in a former divorce suit, to describe the improved lot which is the subject-matter of the ejectment action, and to ask that it be set aside-to her as permanent alimoi^, but by inadvertence a vacant lot owned by her was described by metes and bounds in the divorce suit, instead of the adjoining improved lot which was owned by her husband. On the final trial in…