Legal Opinion
Van Dusen v. Sharrar
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided July 7, 1919PublishedCited by 5 opinions
Appeal from Crawforcl District Cowrt. — M. E. Hutchison. Judge. Action in partition. Mrs. Jacobs, one of the defendants, and also intervener, claims to be the absolute owner of the property sought to be partitioned, under the Rule in Shelley’s Case. The opinion states the facts. The application of the Rule in Shelley’s Case was denied to Mrs. Jacobs. She appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtG-aynor, J.
This case involves the Rule in Shelley’s Case. The record Shows that, on the 17th day of December, 1879, one Stephen Van Dusen was the owner of certain land, and on that day executed the following- instrument, which is the subject-matter of this controversy:
“The grantor, Stephen Van Dusen, and Nancy Van Dusen (his wife), of the town of Wysox in the county of Carroll, state of Illinois, 'for and in consideration of- one dollar in hand paid, convey and warrant to Marvin Van Dusen, of the county of Crawford and state of Iowa, the following described real estate, to wit: The west half of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wescott v. BinfordSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- Doyle v. AndisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- Harris v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Ault v. HillyardSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Brown v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Switzer v. PrattSupreme Court of Iowa · 1946
- In Re Estate of CliftonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Blair v. KenastonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1937
- Beeman v. StilwellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1922
- Westlake v. WestlakeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1928