Legal Opinion

Barham v. Gattuso

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 20, 1950No. 4-9090PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGeorge Rose Smith, J.

This case involves the boundary line between the north half and the south half of an improved lot in tlie city of Osceola. The question is whether the boundary should be fixed along the center line of the lot or along a partition that is 3.4 feet north of the center line.

The appellant, as plaintiff, brought the action against Frank Gattuso and his tenant. Gattuso died before trial, and the cause was revived against his heirs, the appellees. The trial court fixed the boundary in accordance with the partition, which resulted in awarding the disputed 3.4-foot strip to the appellees, who own the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Payne v. McBrideSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
  2. Harris v. E. B. Mooney, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1947
  3. McCall v. OwenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1948
  4. Buckley v. GadsbyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
  5. Trout v. GrubbsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Carney v. DunnSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
  2. Sunray DX Oil Co. v. John E. Mahaffey & Associates, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1971
  3. Webb v. MillerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API