Legal Opinion

Cox v. Groshong

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1843PublishedCited by 6 opinions

ERROR to the District Court for Grant county. In April, 1842, Gox commenced a proceeding in forcible detainer against James GfrosTiong and others, before Samuel Tompkins, a justice of the peace in Grant county.

Read the full summary

ERROR to the District Court for Grant county. In April, 1842, Gox commenced a proceeding in forcible detainer against James GfrosTiong and others, before Samuel Tompkins, a justice of the peace in Grant county. The complaint stated that Cox was “the owner and justly entitled to the possession of the undivided one-fourth part of a certain range of lead ore, and a strip or piece of land on each side, running easterly and westerly across the land hereinafter described, and the right of searching and digging for lead ore thereon, situate on the lands now owned by James GrosTiong, Jonathan Craig…

1Opinion of the CourtMiller, J.

This case was commenced under the act to prevent forcible entries and detainers by George II. Gox, against James Grosliong, Jefferson Groshong, and Stone, before a justice of the peace of Grant county. A. verdict and judgment were rendered against the said defendants before the justice, which they removed to the district court of said county, by certiorari, where the said judgment was reversed; upon which decision of the said district court the said Gox sued out a writ of error.

The examination of the record will require us to con- ■ sider such of the exceptions filed in the district court, to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mills v. MartinNew York Supreme Court · 1821
  2. Thomas v. RobinsonNew York Supreme Court · 1829
  3. Borough of Harrisburg v. CrangleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842
  4. Burdick v. NorrisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1833

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Steen v. NortonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
  2. State v. KriegbaumWisconsin Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Newton v. LearyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
  4. Opinion No. Oag 46-78, (1978), Wisconsin Attorney General Reports1978
  5. State v. Van BrocklinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1927

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