City of St. Louis v. Toney
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. This was an action in the nature of ejectment for about forty-nine acres of land claimed by the plaintiff as a part of the St. Louis common, confirmed by the act of congress of June 18, 1812, and within Brown’s ofiicial Surrey of said common.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. This was an action in the nature of ejectment for about forty-nine acres of land claimed by the plaintiff as a part of the St. Louis common, confirmed by the act of congress of June 18, 1812, and within Brown’s ofiicial Surrey of said common. The defendant claimed title under a confirmation by the act of June 13, 1812, by virtue of the inhabitation, cultivation and possession prior to December 20, 1808, of Joseph Motard and those claiming under him, and also under a confirmation by the act of July 4,1836. At the trial, the plaintiff exhibited the following…
1Opinion of the CourtScott, Judge
The principal question involved in this controversy has, during its pendency, been determined by the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of Guitard et al., v. Stoddard, (16 Howard, 494.) That case settled that a confirmation by the act of the 13th June,-1812, was absolute, depending only on the fact of inhabitation, cultivation or possession prior to *252the 20fch December, 1808; and that' it was not necessary for the confirmee to have received from the Spanish government a grant or survey, or permission to occupy or cultivate the land claimed ; that the act of 26th May, 1824,…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Clark v. HammerleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
- Sbarbero v. MillerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1907
- City of Carondelet v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1857
- Vasquez v. EwingSupreme Court of Missouri · 1868
- Baird v. St. Louis Hospital Ass'nMissouri Court of Appeals · 1877
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.