Legal Opinion

Doe on the demise of Mitchell v. Bowen

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 29, 1856PublishedCited by 5 opinions

ERROR to the Carroll Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtPerkins, J.

Ejectment. Judgment for the defendant.

The lessor of the plaintiff claims title as the sole heir of James Mitchell, deceased, and is entitled to recover if he had not been deprived of his title to the land by a sale made by the administrators upon his father’s estate, through which the defendants derive title.

The validity of that sale must be determined upon a simple inspection of the Probate Court record, no extrinsic evidence having been given.

That record shows, as it appears by the transcript before us—

1. The appointment of the administrators.

2. An inventory and appraisement of the real…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Mills v. DuryeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1813
  2. Borden v. FitchNew York Supreme Court · 1818
  3. Mills v. MartinNew York Supreme Court · 1821
  4. Pawling v. WillsonNew York Supreme Court · 1816
  5. Kilburn v. WoodworthNew York Supreme Court · 1809

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Pursley v. HayesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
  2. Lamont v. VingerMontana Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Seal v. BanesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
  4. Prine v. MappSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
  5. Langsdale v. WoollenIndiana Supreme Court · 1889

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

Powered by the Exa API