McGill v. Somers
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court. 1. It seems unnecessary in submitting a brief in this case to do more than stale the points decided. The decision is so grossly wrong that argument would be wasted. The court decided in refusing the first instruction.
Read the full summary
ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court. 1. It seems unnecessary in submitting a brief in this case to do more than stale the points decided. The decision is so grossly wrong that argument would be wasted. The court decided in refusing the first instruction. That the confirmation to Cottard, and the survey and ipeation under it, did not vest the title to the premises in Cottard of the survey and location were correctly made. 2. The court decided, that if a part of the land confirmed to Cottard was within the eurvey to Motard, or within the commons, and the land in controversy in this suit was not…
1Opinion of the CourtGamble, J.
The plaintiff, McGill, claims the land in controversy, under a confirmation by the act of Congress of 29th April, 1816, to Francis Cottard, and a survey under the confirmation. The. defendant’s claim title under the location of a New Madrid certificate, in the name of James T. O’Carral, or fiis legal representatives. They also set up, as an outstanding title, a confirmation to Joachim Roy’s representatives, and a survey under it, conveying the land in controversy. The evidence to establish Roy’s title, consists of extracts from the minutes kept by the recorder of land titles when taking proof…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Gibson v. ChouteauSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Scannell v. American Soda Fountain Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Dent v. SigersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- Gibson v. ChouteauMissouri Court of Appeals · 1879
- Vasquez v. EwingSupreme Court of Missouri · 1868
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.