Hedges v. Pollard
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Lincoln Circuit Court. — Hon. E. M. Hughes, Judge. (1) That part of defendants’ answer stricken out sets up a good equitable defense. It shows that the adjoining owners recognized and acquiesced in the fence as the line and used the same fence by building to it on the line.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lincoln Circuit Court. — Hon. E. M. Hughes, Judge. (1) That part of defendants’ answer stricken out sets up a good equitable defense. It shows that the adjoining owners recognized and acquiesced in the fence as the line and used the same fence by building to it on the line. Blair v. Smith, 16 Mo. 273; Dolde v. Yodicka, 49 Mo. 98; Eice v. Bruce, 49 Mo. 231; Majors v. Eice, 57 Mo. 384; Evans v. Kunze, 128 Mo. 671; Ersting v. Gleason, 137 Mo. 594. (2) The court should, have sustained defendants’ demurrer to plaintiffs’ evidence. Ohristal v. Craig, 80 Mo. 367. (3) The reading of…
1Opinion of the CourtMaeshall, J.
Ejectment to recover about sixty acres of land in Lincoln county. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion.
I
This controversy arises out of a difference between the surveys made by F. W. Rohland, in 1846, and by John E. Wilson, made in 1875, and those made by W. G. Seaman in 1890 and by F. D. Brown in 1892, as to the proper dividing line between United States survey 757 in fractional section 18, township 48, range 3 east,and fractional sections 7 and 12 of the same township and range.
If the surveys made in 1846 and 1875 are correct the defendants have title, and if those made in 1890 and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Goltermann v. SchiermeyerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
3Cited by9 opinions
- Courtner v. PutnamSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
- Edie v. ColemanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1940
- McCabe v. BruereSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- Diers v. PetersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1921
- Badger Lumber Co. v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1936
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.