Harmon v. Steinman
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Winnesheilc District Court. This was an action for the recovery of real estate. The defence relied upon, was a contract with the school fund commissioner of Winnesheik county, for the purchase of the land, of the date of June 10,1854, and possession of the land by defendant, and those under whom he claimed, from the date of the contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Winnesheilc District Court. This was an action for the recovery of real estate. The defence relied upon, was a contract with the school fund commissioner of Winnesheik county, for the purchase of the land, of the date of June 10,1854, and possession of the land by defendant, and those under whom he claimed, from the date of the contract. The plaintiff claimed by virtue of a patent from the State, of the date of May 1, 1856. The cause was tried by the court, and not by a jury, and the court found that “ the plaintiff had a valid subsisting interest in, and the legal title to, the…
1Opinion of the Court
Stockton, J. —
The evidence on which the finding of the court was based, as set forth in the record, was, that the plaintiff claimed under a patent from the State for the land in dispute, dated May 1,1856, and the defendant under a contract of purchase with the School Fund Commissioner, dated June 10, 1854. Nothing further appears. Under this state of facts, we think the District Court properly ruled and decided; that by virtue of the patent, the plaintiff held the legal title to the land, which in this action, must prevail over the equitable title of defendant under his contract of purchase…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rosierz v. Van DamSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Cole v. GillSupreme Court of Iowa · 1863