Spalding v. Mayhall
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Ralls Circuit Court. This was an action of unlawful entry and detainer to recover possession of certain premises in the town of New London.
Read the full summary
Error to Ralls Circuit Court. This was an action of unlawful entry and detainer to recover possession of certain premises in the town of New London. On the trial in the circuit court, the jury, under the instruction of the court, found a special verdict, of which the following is the substance : That plaintiff erected the house ■ on the premises in controversy and occupied the same up to September 17, 1855; that said premises had been purchased by Southworfch and Wellman at a sheriff’s sale under an execution against plaintiff Spalding; that Southworth and Wellman in August, 1855, after their…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, Judge
It is declared in the third section of the act concerning forcible entry and detainer that “ when any person wrongfully and without force by disseizin shall obtain and continue in possession of any lands, tenements or other possessions, and' — after demand made in writing for the deliverance of the possession thereof by the person having the legal right to such possession, his agent or attorney — shall refuse or neglect to quit such possession, such person shall be deemed guilty of an unlawful detainer.” Lord Coke says: “ A disseizin is when one enters intending to usurp the possession, and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Brumfield v. ReynoldsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1816
- Warren v. Ritter & RitterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1848
- Wunsch v. GretelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
3Cited by14 opinions
- Silvey v. SummerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- May v. LuckettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- P.M. Construction Services, Inc. v. LewisMissouri Court of Appeals · 2000
- McCartney's v. AldersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
- Lesan Advertising Co. v. CastlemanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.