McGehee v. Oxner
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Grant Chancery Court; J. P. Henderson, Chancellor; The second report of the commissioners was set aside by the court for the same reason as the first, in direct conflict with C. & M. Dig., § 8107. The court has no authority to direct the commissioners to make partition until after hearing the evidence.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Grant Chancery Court; J. P. Henderson, Chancellor; The second report of the commissioners was set aside by the court for the same reason as the first, in direct conflict with C. & M. Dig., § 8107. The court has no authority to direct the commissioners to make partition until after hearing the evidence. The situation of the property, and not the circumstances of the parties, must control the court in determining whether there should he a partition in kind or1 sale: 54 Fed. Rep. 961; 40 Wis. 357. The commissioners act as judges, the whole power of the court being delegated to them…
1Opinion of the CourtHumphreys, J.
Appellant instituted suit in the Grant Chancery Court against appellees for partition of the northeast quarter of section 21, township 5 south, range 12 west, in said county, alleging that he owned an undivided one-twelfth interest, Minnie Miller an undivided one-sixth interest, and Oneal Oxner, Fannie Boyd and Martha Oxner an .undivided one-fourth interest each in said real‘estate; that appellees inherited their several interests, and appellant acquired his by purchase. The prayer of the bill was for a decree of partition if it could be made without prejudice to the owners thereof, and, if…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Moore v. WilleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Glasscock v. GlasscockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ingram v. RaifordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Best v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1978