McArthur v. Porter
Ohio Supreme Court
The substance of tbe case made in tbe bill and answers, is this : In May, 1797, George Porter, then being unmarried, purchased of Nicholas Talliaferro, part of an entry for land standing in the name of Talliaferro, and gave his bond for the purchase money, reciting that it was given for the purchase money of the land, and specifying that the land was to be held as a security until the bond was taken up.
Read the full summary
The substance of tbe case made in tbe bill and answers, is this : In May, 1797, George Porter, then being unmarried, purchased of Nicholas Talliaferro, part of an entry for land standing in the name of Talliaferro, and gave his bond for the purchase money, reciting that it was given for the purchase money of the land, and specifying that the land was to be held as a security until the bond was taken up. Porter obtained an assignment of the entry and warrant from Talliaferro, had a survey executed, and in August, 1797, obtained a patent in his own name. In April, 1798, he married the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court :
The view taken of this cause by a majority of the judges, renders it unnecessary to decide upon the validity of the sheriff's sale — the existence of the equitable lien relied upon — or the *101power of the territorial courts, as courts of law merely, to enforce such equitable lien. Admitting every one of these points to be decided as the complainant contends for, still he has presented no case that entitles him to the relief sought.
George Porter, the deceased, acquired, by his patent, an estate of inheritance in the lands in question. The defendant,- Sarah, by her marriage with…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Lessee of Morgan v. BurnetOhio Supreme Court · 1849
- De Camp v. DobbinsNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1878
- Hays v. HorineSupreme Court of Iowa · 1861