Legal Opinion

Hawkinberry v. Metz

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided October 3, 1922PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MilleR, Judge:

The sufficiency of the bill upon demurrer, sustained by *638the circuit court, has been certified to us for our judgment thereon.

The object of the bill, disclosed by its prayer, is either to compel a reconveyance by the defendants to plaintiff, directly or by a commissioner, of a tract of fifteen acres and the life estate of plaintiff in five acres, in Marion County, or that plaintiff’s deed or contract be canceled as a cloud upon her title.

As a basis for this relief it is alleged in the bill that the plaintiff at the instance of the defendant, her daughter, on August 9, 1906,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Troll v. CarterWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1879
  2. Wilson v. BradenWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Caswell v. CaswellWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Miller v. HoltWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Smith v. HenningWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1877

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Tate v. United Fuel Gas Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1952
  2. United Shoe Repairing MacHine Co. v. CarneyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Gleason v. ThomasWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Bobbitt v. BobbittWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Amherst Land Company v. United Fuel Gas Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1954

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API