Lloyd v. Higbee
Illinois Supreme Court
Amasa E. Higbee, who was complainant below, filed his bill in the Circuit Court of Warren, alleging that he is the legal owner in fee simple of the north-east quarter of section fifteen, township eight north, range three west of the fourth principal meridian, situate in Warren county, by chain of conveyances from the United States, as follows: 1st, a patent to Resin Newell; 2nd, a deed from Resin Newell to Stephen Wheeler and S. E. Hunt; 3rd, a deed from S. P. Hunt to…
Read the full summary
Amasa E. Higbee, who was complainant below, filed his bill in the Circuit Court of Warren, alleging that he is the legal owner in fee simple of the north-east quarter of section fifteen, township eight north, range three west of the fourth principal meridian, situate in Warren county, by chain of conveyances from the United States, as follows: 1st, a patent to Resin Newell; 2nd, a deed from Resin Newell to Stephen Wheeler and S. E. Hunt; 3rd, a deed from S. P. Hunt to Stephen Wheeler; 4th, a deed from Stephen Wheeler to George Williamson ; 5th, a deed from George Williamson to Amasa Higbee;…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
It is first insisted, as grounds of reversal of the decree, that Amasa Higbee was not a competent witness in this case. He, by his quit-claim deed, incurred no liability to Lloyd, nor .to defendant in error by his release to him. If this release to complainant was made in good faith, and the record discloses nothing to indicate that it was not, he thereby became divested of all interest in the premises in controversy. The fact that complainant was his son, may create a suspicion that he is not free from bias, and the fact that he had previously conveyed to Lloyd, may go to his credibility,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rarick v. WomerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Hess v. WeickerIllinois Supreme Court · 1923