Menkins v. Blumenthal
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The fifteenth instruction ’asked by the defendant, and refused by the court below, was as follows : £t Under and by virtue of the deed in evidence Horn Wilson Primm to plaintiff, the plaintiff acquired no title to any land lying south of the southern boundary line of the north-east and north-west quarters of block 53, in the town of Carondelet, as the same is…
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The fifteenth instruction ’asked by the defendant, and refused by the court below, was as follows : £t Under and by virtue of the deed in evidence Horn Wilson Primm to plaintiff, the plaintiff acquired no title to any land lying south of the southern boundary line of the north-east and north-west quarters of block 53, in the town of Carondelet, as the same is designated and laid down on the plat of survey of Said town.” In lieu of this, the court instructed the jury to find for the…
1Opinion of the CourtGamble, Judge
The plaintiff brought his action to recover possession of a piece of ground in Carondelet, describing it as being part of block No. 53. He showed a certificate from the recorder of land titles, issued under the act of 26th May, 1824, to Amable Guion’s legal representatives, for a lot in block 53, the boundaries of which are given, and which include 160 feet 7-J inches on Church street, by 320 feet on E. street^ bounded on the north by E. street, east by Church street, west by Third street, and south by the balance of the square. The plaintiff showed title under the heirs of Amable Guión, by a…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Thrasher v. RoysterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
- Menkens v. BlumenthalSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858