Johnson v. Fluetsch
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from the Gasconade Circuit Court. — Hon. R. Hirzel, Judge. (1) Unless defendant or his grantor, Stephan, was entitled to a patent from the Government upon the so-called location of the military bounty land warrant by .1 ohn' F. Stephan, as the assignee of Phillip Rausch, made on May 8, 1849, the finding and judgment should have been for plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Gasconade Circuit Court. — Hon. R. Hirzel, Judge. (1) Unless defendant or his grantor, Stephan, was entitled to a patent from the Government upon the so-called location of the military bounty land warrant by .1 ohn' F. Stephan, as the assignee of Phillip Rausch, made on May 8, 1849, the finding and judgment should have been for plaintiff. Unless one or the other were so entitled to a patent, plaintiff, as a legal holder of the patent issued to him, can not be charged as trustee for defendant. Bohall v. Dilla, 114 U. S. 47; Smelting Co. v. Kemp, 104 U. S. 636; Sparks v. Pierce,…
1Opinion of the CourtGantt, P. J.
This is an action of ejectment for the following lands in Gasconade county, in this State: the north half of the southwest quarter of section 3, and west half of lot number one of the northeast quarter, and the east half of lot number one of the northwest quarter of said section 3, all in township 44, range 5, west, except 25 acres, described by metes and bounds as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of said east half of lot one of the northwest quarter of said section three and running thence east forty chains, to the northeast corner of the west one-half of said lot number one of the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Stark v. StarrsSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Wirth v. BransonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Myers v. CroftSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Bohall v. DillaSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Creek Land & Improvement Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Wilcox v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Baxter v. WeberSupreme Court of Missouri · 1922
- Di Fernando v. Bowers, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1918
- State ex rel. Morris v. SullivanOhio Supreme Court · 1909