Woods v. Ely
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from circuit court, Clark county. Hon. J. O. Andrews, Judge. Action to recover for breach of warranty. Defendants had judgment and plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. Under the statutes of Illinois exhibiting claims to the court means filing with court for allowance.
Read the full summary
Appeal from circuit court, Clark county. Hon. J. O. Andrews, Judge. Action to recover for breach of warranty. Defendants had judgment and plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. Under the statutes of Illinois exhibiting claims to the court means filing with court for allowance. Wallace v. Gotchell, 106 Ills. 314. Executors and administrators should interpose the statute of limitations against claims, but their failure to do so, will not deprive the heirs and devisees of its protection. McCoy v. Morrow, 18111. 519; O’Conner v. O’Conner, 52111. 316; Judy v. Kelly, 11 111. 211;…
1Opinion of the CourtKellam, J.
The plaintiff, who is now appellant, alleges the following facts as his cause of action: In March, 1882, one R. S. W. Ely, then and until his death a resident of the state of Illinois, made, with others, a warranty deed, with full covenants, of certain lands in the state of Texas, to the plaintiff and appellant, for the consideration of $1,000. That the grantors in said deed had no title to the lands described, and that the plaintiff has never received any therefrom. That ill May, 1888, the said R. S. W. Ely died, leaving as heirs, surviving him, the defendants, Spencer and Hattie Ely. That…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hill v. RessegieuNew York Supreme Court · 1852
3Cited by4 opinions
- Speck v. AndersonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
- Lesser v. PominCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- LeSueur v. QuillianSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1929
- Hancock v. CochranSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927