Legal Opinion
Reavis v. Reavis
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California
Decided November 27, 1899No. 12,158PublishedCited by 2 opinions
In Equity. On motion by respondent Clarke to dismiss for want of jurisdiction.
1Opinion of the Court
MORROW, Circuit Judge.
The complainants in this action are residents and citizens of the state of Missouri, and the respondents residents and citizens of the state of California. Complainants, in their amended hill, allege that they are the heirs at law of one Andrew Reavis, deceased, and that the respondents David M. Reavis, James J. Reavis, and Crawford W. Clarke have fraudulently acquired, held, and used certain real and personal property formerly belonging to the said Andrew Reavis, and that, by reason of this fraud, David M. Reavis and James el. Reavis, prior to April 27, 1892, held, and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Board of Trustees of Oberlin College v. BlairU.S. Circuit Court for the District of West Virginia · 1895
- Consolidated Water Co. v. BabcockU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1896
- Perin v. MegibbenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1892
- Cilley v. PattenU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Hampshire · 1894
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gage v. Riverside Trust Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1906
- Reavis v. ReavisU.S. Circuit Court for the District of California · 1900