Holmes v. Countiss
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the CourtDoNham, J.
The question involved in this appeal is whether a deed from J. M. Countiss and wife to T. B. Holmes, which deed is set out in the complaint filed by appellant in the court below, was sufficient to convey an after-acquired title. It is alleged in the complaint, that on August 31, 1932, Countiss and wife executed and der livered the deed in. question to appellant. The deed recites that in consideration of $10 cash in hand paid by Holmes and other good and valuable considerations, Countiss and wife “have bargained and sold and by these presents do bargain, sell' and quitclaim”, unto T. B. Holmes…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Gibson v. ChouteauSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Doe ex dem. Phillips' Heirs v. PorterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1840
- Webb v. Elyton Land Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Derrick v. BrownSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Holland v. RogersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1878
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Gibson v. PickettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1974
- Dierks Lumber & Coal Co. v. MeyerDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1949
- Adamson v. Wolfe, TrusteeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1940
- Gibson v. PickettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1974
- Henningsen v. StrombergMontana Supreme Court · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.