Pollock v. Speidel
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to the District Court of Clermont county. The original action in this case was brought in the Court-of Common Pleas of Clermont county, by the plaintiffs in error, who are the children and legal heirs of the body of James Pollock, deceased, to recover the possession of certain real estate of which they claim to be seized in fee-simple, and of which they allege the defendant unlawfully holds the possession.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Clermont county. The original action in this case was brought in the Court-of Common Pleas of Clermont county, by the plaintiffs in error, who are the children and legal heirs of the body of James Pollock, deceased, to recover the possession of certain real estate of which they claim to be seized in fee-simple, and of which they allege the defendant unlawfully holds the possession. The defendant, by answer, denies the title of plaintiffs, and sets up title in himself. Upon these, issues the cause was submitted to the court, a jury being waived; and the…
1Opinion of the Court
Scott, Chief Judge.
The assignments of error in this case draw in question the relevancy of the deed of John Pollock, Sr., to his son, John Pollock, Jr., the grandfather of the plaintiffs, executed in 1807, and the legal effect of said deed, taken in connection with the other testimony and the facts admitted by the parties.
Plaintiffs claim that there is nothing in the terms of this deed to change the rights of the parties, as shown by the evidence on the first trial, under which it was held by the Supreme Court, in 17 Ohio St. 439, that the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment. But we think…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Dart v. DartSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1828
- Wagers v. DickeyOhio Supreme Court · 1848
- De Mill v. LockwoodU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1853