Rugg v. Lemley
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; Leland beatherman, Chancellor; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The plaintiffs, B. T. Temlej'' and M. F. Work, are the owners of lot 27 in block 89 in the city of Hot Springs, on which is situated a two-story brick building, the center of the south wall of the building being on the line between lots 47 and 48. Tot 48 is owned by D. C. Rugg, who leased the same to defendant Ed Spear.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; Leland beatherman, Chancellor; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The plaintiffs, B. T. Temlej'' and M. F. Work, are the owners of lot 27 in block 89 in the city of Hot Springs, on which is situated a two-story brick building, the center of the south wall of the building being on the line between lots 47 and 48. Tot 48 is owned by D. C. Rugg, who leased the same to defendant Ed Spear. This suit was brought in chancery by the plaintiffs, Temley and Work, against defendants Spear and Tedwidge (a building contractor) to enjoin them from using the south wall of…
1Opinion of the Court
McCulloch, J.,
(after stating the facts.) The facts of this case are practically undisputed.
There are two questions of law presented: (1) Whether the court had jurisdiction to hear and determine the cause of action against appellant Rugg for the recovery of half the cost of the wall;'and (2) which of the two claimants should recover the same, Mrs. Womack, the widow and legatee of J. P. Warren, the original owner of lot 47 and builder of the wall, or Eemley and Work, the grantees of Warren under deed conveying lot 47 “with all appurtenances thereunto belonging.”
The proof failed to sustain the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Maine v. CumstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Sannoner v. Jacobson & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1885
- Gibson v. HoldenIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
- Richardson v. TobeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Roche v. UllmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bank of Hoxie v. MeriwetherSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
- Erwin v. Allied Van Lines, Inc.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1965
- Fort Smith Gas Co. v. GeanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
- McCormick v. StoneheartCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1917