Martin v. Smith

(partially dissents).

I concur in affirmance of the trial court’s judgment insofar as it denied appellant any relief on his cross-action for specific performance and awarded appellee an undivided 2/3 interest in and to survey 63 containing 640 acres. In my Opinion the judgment, insofar as it attempts to award to appellee an undivided 23/24 interest in and to the other five sections of land, is void because the description of the land is insufficient to enable an officer to place ap-pellee in possession thereof without exercising judicial functions.

It is true that appellant did not raise this…