Long v. Timms
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Olay Circuit Court. — Hon. J, MI. Sandusky, Judge. (1) In order to ascertain the true intent, meaning and purpose of the deed made by Valentine Smallwood Peyton, December 5, 1836, the court must take into-consideration the circumstances in which he then stood with respect to the members of his family. The intent," meaning and purpose of the grantor is the proper legal interpretation of the deed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Olay Circuit Court. — Hon. J, MI. Sandusky, Judge. (1) In order to ascertain the true intent, meaning and purpose of the deed made by Valentine Smallwood Peyton, December 5, 1836, the court must take into-consideration the circumstances in which he then stood with respect to the members of his family. The intent," meaning and purpose of the grantor is the proper legal interpretation of the deed. The court will enforce that-purpose and interpretation, unless to do so would violate some fixed rule of law. 3 Wash, on Real Prop. [4 Ed.] pp. 384, 404; Cathright v. Callaway Co., 10 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtBrace, J.
This is an action in ejectment in which the plaintiff seeks to recover an undivided fourth part *515of certain real estate described in the petition. There is no dispute about the facts, the case was tried by the court without a jury, and the plaintiff obtained judgment for the undivided eighth part of the premises; and the defendant appeals.
Valentine S. Peyton is the common source of title. In the year 1836, he was seized in fee simple of a tract of land in Clay county, containing two hundred and seventy ácres, on which he. with his wife, was then residing. He then had living one married…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Cross v. HochSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- Murphy v. CarlinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Tindall v. TindallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Drake v. CraneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Mutual Life Ins. v. KellyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.