Legal Opinion

Alexander v. Hickox

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided March 15, 1864PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from St. Louis Land Court. I. The court below erred in admitting the deed of Thomas Barnett in evidence against the objections of the defendants. That the deed had been mutilated by erasing the name therefrom of one of the grantees, is apparent from an inspection of the deed itself. That it was so mutilated after its delivery to Orme, is clearly shown by the testimony of Thomas Barnett, the maker of the deed.

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis Land Court. I. The court below erred in admitting the deed of Thomas Barnett in evidence against the objections of the defendants. That the deed had been mutilated by erasing the name therefrom of one of the grantees, is apparent from an inspection of the deed itself. That it was so mutilated after its delivery to Orme, is clearly shown by the testimony of Thomas Barnett, the maker of the deed. The effect of this mutilation of the deed is to render it inoperative to convey any estate in the lands therein described. (1 New Hamp. 145; M'Johns. 293 ; 8 Cowan, 71; 4 Kent,…

1Opinion of the CourtBates, Judge

This is an action in the nature of ejectment for a lot in the city of St. Louis. Both parties claim under Thomas Barnett. In 1832, Barnett by deed conveyed the lot to Orme and Thomas; afterwards the name of Thomas was erased from the deed; and still, subsequently, Thomas conveyed his interest in the lot to Orme, who conveyed the whole to the-plaintiffs.

In 1846, a sheriff’s sale of Barnett’s interest in the lot. was made to McDonald, who conveyed to Willi, one of the-defendants.

*500At the request of the plaintiffs the court instructed the jury:

“ That the sale of the sheriff of St. Louis county to…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Robbins v. MageeIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  2. Robb v. N. W. Electric Power CooperativeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1957
  3. North v. HenneberryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
  4. Citizens Bank v. TaylorSupreme Court of Georgia · 1929
  5. Eneff v. ScottSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API