Legal Opinion

Locke v. Barbour

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1878PublishedCited by 10 opinions

From the Hamilton Circuit Court

1Opinion of the CourtPerkins, J.

Suit for partition, brought by John M. Barbour, trustee for Sarah E. Potter, Mary Potter, Alpha Potter and Catherine Potter, against "William M. Locke, George Bonebrake, James S. Lytle,Lewis Morris and James R.Parker. The lands of which partition is sought are those of which Richard F. Lytle died seized, and disposed of by his last will, a copy of which follows :

“ I, Richard F. Lytle, Sen., of Hamilton county, State of Indiana, being of sound mind and memory, and considering the uncertainty of this transitory life, do thereupon make, ordain and publish this to be my last will and testament.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Ware v. RichardsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1853
  2. Siceloff v. Redman's AdministratorIndiana Supreme Court · 1866
  3. Nelson v. DavisIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
  4. Gonzales v. BartonIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  5. Huxford v. MilliganIndiana Supreme Court · 1875

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Outland v. BowenIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Matter of BerndtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · 1983
  3. Miller v. Jones (In Re Jones)District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1984
  4. Ewing v. JonesIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
  5. French v. FrenchIndiana Court of Appeals · 1915

5 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