Legal Opinion

Murray v. City of Huntingburg

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided April 11, 1918No. 23,266PublishedCited by 4 opinions

From the Dubois Circuit Court; John L. Bretz, Judge. Action by Nancy E. Murray against the city of Huntingburg and another. From a judgment for defendants, the plaintiff appeals. (Transferred from the Appellate Court under §1405 Burns 1914, Acts 1901 p. 590.)

1Opinion of the CourtTownsend, J.

— Appellant sought to quiet title to a strip of ground about five feet wide and 125 feet long running north and south along the east side of and adjacent to her lot. There was a general finding and judgment for appellees, city of Huntingburg and George Finke, contractor. Error presented by motion for a new trial: the decision is not supported by sufficient evidence and is contrary to law.

In 1872 proprietors platted an addition to the town, now the appellee city of Huntingburg. In 1875 appellant purchased lot No. 62 in this addition. This lot as platted is fifty-eight feet wide and 125 feet…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hall v. BreyfogleIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Interstate Iron & Steel Co. v. City of East ChicagoIndiana Supreme Court · 1918
  3. Selz, Schwab & Co. v. GullionIndiana Supreme Court · 1918

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Steele v. FowlerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1942
  2. Smith v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Walmer v. Town of BremenIndiana Court of Appeals · 1934
  4. Selz, Schwab & Co. v. GullionIndiana Supreme Court · 1918

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API