Legal Opinion

Hauck v. Crawford

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1953No. File 9389PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRudolph, J.

Although in form an action to quiet title, the real purpose of this action is to cancel and set aside a certain mineral deed admittedly signed by plaintiff and cer tain other deeds transferring the mineral rights by the grantee named in the original deed. No one has questioned the form of the action. The trial court entered judgment cancel-ling the deeds and defendants have appealed.

Cancellation was asked because of alleged fraud, and it was upon this basis that the trial court entered its judgment. The defendants contend, first, that there was no fraud and second, that the mineral rights…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. HouckSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1942
  2. State v. StudebakerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1933
  3. Smith v. CleaverSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Pry v. PryIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Lambert v. BradleySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1950

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hoffer v. CrawfordNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Law Capital, Inc. v. KetteringSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Muhlbauer v. Estate of OlsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  4. Healy v. OsborneSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2019
  5. Rosenquist v. HarrisDistrict Court, D. North Dakota · 1956

1 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