Frohner v. Rodgers
Montana Supreme Court
Appeal from Tlvi/cd District, Lewis and Ola/rke County. The judgment was rendered by Wade, J. What judgment should be entered on the verdict ? This is the only question before the court. There is no exception to the verdict. The evidence cannot be examined. Questions of boundaries, identity of monuments, etc., are subjects of parol proof and are always left to the jury.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Tlvi/cd District, Lewis and Ola/rke County. The judgment was rendered by Wade, J. What judgment should be entered on the verdict ? This is the only question before the court. There is no exception to the verdict. The evidence cannot be examined. Questions of boundaries, identity of monuments, etc., are subjects of parol proof and are always left to the jury. Tyler on Ejectment, 820 ; Curtis on Patents, 253 ; Davis v. Bainsford, 17 Mass. 207 ; Ferris v. Coover, 10 Oal. 625. Where the jury finds for the plaintiff in ejéctment, he is entitled to judgment for a less amount of land…
1Opinion of the Court
Servís, J.
The defendants file objections in this court to all that part of the transcript except the judgment-roll thereof, because the statement upon appeal does not contain an assignment of errors, as required by section 371 of the Practice Act, which objection, we think, well taken, and fully sustained by the authorities cited by defendants’ counsel.
The action proper is one in the nature of ejectment, under our Code, and for the recovery of the possession of certain quartz leads or lodes.
TTpon an examination of the judgment-roll proper, we find the complaint seeks to recover from the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- City of Durham v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Butte Electric Railway Co. v. MathewsMontana Supreme Court · 1906
- Haupt's EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Northampton County · 1946