Duncan v. Liddle
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from' St. Francis Chancery Court; Edward D. Robertson, 'Chancellor; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The plaintiffs, John Duncan, a minor whose disabilities had been removed by an order of court, and James Duncan, a minor by his next friend, brought suit for the possession of certain lands in .St.
Read the full summary
Appeal from' St. Francis Chancery Court; Edward D. Robertson, 'Chancellor; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The plaintiffs, John Duncan, a minor whose disabilities had been removed by an order of court, and James Duncan, a minor by his next friend, brought suit for the possession of certain lands in .St. Francis County, conveyed to them and their mother by their father Elijah Duncan, in August, 1902. The deed recites: * * * “I hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said Emma F. Duncan, John Duncan and James Duncan all my right,-title, interest, etc.” * * * “The interest of said Emma F. Duncan…
1Opinion of the Court
Kirby, J.,
(after stating the facts). It is properly contended that this case is 'controlled by Watson v. Henderson, 98 Ark. 63. It was there held that the chancery court was without jurisdiction to order the sale of the lands of a minor for reinvestment and the proceedings of the St. Francis chancery court ordering the sale of the lands herein being without jurisdiction, its decree was void and plaintiffs acquired no title to the lands through the deed of its commissioner conveying same in accordance with the proceedings and decree therefor.
It is insisted for appellees that under the original…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Watson v. HendersonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Bedford v. BedfordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
3Cited by1 opinion
- Nelson v. MeadeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1930