Elliott v. Mitchell
Texas Supreme Court
(Associate-Justices Moore and GouLd, having been of counsel, were disqualified. This fact was certified to the Governor, who appointed Charles S. West and William M. Walton special justices for the trial and determination of this cause.) Special Court: Roberts, Chief Justice ; West and Walton, Associate Justices. Appeal from Eavarro. Tried below before the Hon. F. B. Wood. The facts are given in the opinion. Ho brief for appellants came to the reporters.
1Opinion of the Court
C. S. West, Special Justice.
This suit was instituted in June, 1852, against twenty-five defendants, for two leagues of land. By compromise and settlement, however, the number of defendants has been reduced to two, and the controversy as to the land has been narrowed down to less than two thirds of a league.
The present appellees are the executors of Solomon Van Hook, one of the original defendants, who died pending this suit, and Jubilee L. McKinny, also one of the original de-, fendants.
The appellees did not rely on the statutory plea of “ not guilty,” but set up four grounds of special…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Vardeman v. LawsonTexas Supreme Court · 1856
- Hamilton v. MenifeeTexas Supreme Court · 1854
- Miller v. AlexanderTexas Supreme Court · 1852
- Elliot v. MitchellTexas Supreme Court · 1866
- Byrne v. FaganTexas Supreme Court · 1856
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Mondragon v. MondragonTexas Supreme Court · 1923
- McNeeley v. South Penn Oil Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1903
- Avent v. ArringtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Dawson v. TumlinsonTexas Supreme Court · 1951
- Converse v. RingerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1894
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.