Gentry v. Woodson
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL from Boone Circuit Court. 1st. The proof given, consisting exclusively of the deed of November, 1818, and the partition deed of September, 1821, did not maintain the issue on the part of the plaintiff, and therefore the instruction asked was properly given. 2d.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Boone Circuit Court. 1st. The proof given, consisting exclusively of the deed of November, 1818, and the partition deed of September, 1821, did not maintain the issue on the part of the plaintiff, and therefore the instruction asked was properly given. 2d. The chain of title offered in evidence by the plaintiff, consisting of the five deeds, was properly excluded on the ground that two of the deeds, embraced in the chain, had been executed under powers of attorney, which were neither produced nor offered in evidence. 3d. The rejected evidence was offered too late. After the proof…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, J.
This was a petition for dower in lot number seven, in the town of Columbia. The defendant, among other pleas, pleaded non seisin in the husband. On the trial of this issue, the plaintiff gave in evidence a deed, dated 14th Nov., 1818, from Anderson Woods and others to Thomas Duley and others, conveying the tract of land upon which the lot in controversy is situated, in trust, to lay out a town thereon, and dispose of the lots for the benefit of the proprietors, of whom Richard Gentry was one. The plaintiff also gave in evidence a deed of partition among the proprietors of said tract, dated…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Dorman v. East St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1934
- McGuire v. CookSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Maloney v. McCulloughSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1949
- Martin v. TrailSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Warren v. WilliamsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887