Holmes v. McGee
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Kansas Court of Common Pleas. I. No facts are averred in the petition showing a partnership between the parties to the suit. The words “ equal partners” denote the share or extent of interest of each of the parties. If the land is partnership property, it still may be partitioned. The legal title is vested in plaintiff and defendant jointly.
Read the full summary
Error to Kansas Court of Common Pleas. I. No facts are averred in the petition showing a partnership between the parties to the suit. The words “ equal partners” denote the share or extent of interest of each of the parties. If the land is partnership property, it still may be partitioned. The legal title is vested in plaintiff and defendant jointly. I. The plaintiff seeks to convert a regular petition for account and settlement of a partnership transaction into a statutory action for partition. The petition gives no description of the “ premises sought to be divided.” (R. 0. 1855, p. 1111, §…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, Judge
This was a proceeding for partition. The petition states that the plaintiff and defendant are the joint owners of a tract of forty acres of land, conveyed to them by Riddlesberger, and that they are “ equal partners” in the same, that the tract had been subdivided into town lots, a designated number of which had been sold ; and that the residue of the lots were the joint property of the plaintiff and defendant, of which partition was asked. A demurrer was filed and sustained on the ground that it appeared from the petition that the parties were partners in the land, and it was not averred…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Duhring v. DuhringSupreme Court of Missouri · 1854
3Cited by3 opinions
- Primm v. WalkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
- Holton v. GuinnU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri · 1895
- Troll v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1914