Shantz v. Reynolds
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Hickory Circuit Court. — Hon. Argus Cox, Judge. The plaintiffs’ complaint wholly fails to state any cause of action. It does not state any facts from which this or any other court could determine how they claim the possession of the land, whether as lessors, purchasers from lessors, or owners, or in what way.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Hickory Circuit Court. — Hon. Argus Cox, Judge. The plaintiffs’ complaint wholly fails to state any cause of action. It does not state any facts from which this or any other court could determine how they claim the possession of the land, whether as lessors, purchasers from lessors, or owners, or in what way. If as lessors, when were the premises let, and when by the terms of the lease did defendant’s lease expire! They merely state the legal conclusion, “that-they had the legal right to the possession of the - premises.” ■ How did they get it? Who let the premises, or when…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
This action is founded on the following complaint in unlawful detainer:
phunt, sufficien“I. W. Shantz and E. W. Kroff complain to W. T. Booher, justice of the peace within and for the county of Dallas, and state of Missouri, that on the first day of November, 1895, they had the legal right to the possession of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of section 20, township 34, range 20, in Dallas county, Missouri, together with the improvements thereon, and that M. L. Reynolds willfully and without force holds the possession of the same premises after the termination of the time for…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Witte v. QuinnMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
- Ish v. ChiltonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
- Bradford v. TillyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
- Russell v. McCartneyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886