Small v. Lutz
Oregon Supreme Court
From Lake: W. C. Hale, Judge. In April, 1895, George H. Small commenced an action in the Circuit Court for Lake County against Elmer D. Lutz to recover possession of certain real property.
Read the full summary
From Lake: W. C. Hale, Judge. In April, 1895, George H. Small commenced an action in the Circuit Court for Lake County against Elmer D. Lutz to recover possession of certain real property. Lutz answered by alleging that he was informed and believed that he had a good defense in equity, but could not obtain full or adequate relief at law, and at the same time filed a cross complaint in which he alleges that he is in possession of the property in controversy, claiming in good faith to own it in fee; that he claims title under and by virtue of a patent from the United States issued to him on…
1Opinion
Decided 7 August, 1899.
On Petition for Rehearing.
[68 Pac. 79.]
2Opinion of the CourtJustice Bean
3. It is claimed that the opinion filed proceeds upon the erroneous theory that the findings of fact made in the equity suit had not been filed in the action. Upon that matter counsel is mistaken, for, although perhaps not clearly appearing in the opinion, it was assumed that the findings had been so filed, and that the judgment was entered thereon. It was held, however, that, because the cross bill had been dismissed for want of jurisdiction, such findings could not legally become the basis of judgment . It is also claimed that we…
3Cases cited4 opinions
- Yates v. RussellCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1820
- Wear v. RaganMississippi Supreme Court · 1855
- Sawyer v. McAdieMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Townsnnd v. MooreTexas Supreme Court · 1854