Hatfield v. Wallace
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from theMox-gan Circuit court. The only point in the case is, whether an improvement on public lands is subject to execution? We contend that it is, and cite Laws of Mo. 260, sec. 17: 262, sec. 59; 281, sec. 28, and 2 B. Com. 196-280. sec. 25. 1st. That the property sold under execution was not sub» ject to the sale, and therefore the plaintiff by the purchase obtained no right thereto. 2d.
Read the full summary
Appeal from theMox-gan Circuit court. The only point in the case is, whether an improvement on public lands is subject to execution? We contend that it is, and cite Laws of Mo. 260, sec. 17: 262, sec. 59; 281, sec. 28, and 2 B. Com. 196-280. sec. 25. 1st. That the property sold under execution was not sub» ject to the sale, and therefore the plaintiff by the purchase obtained no right thereto. 2d. That if it were subject to sale, the record preserved was not proper for'the recovery of it.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court by
Tompkins, Judge,. This action was brought by Hatfield against Wallace before a justice of the peace. The justice’s judgment being for the defendant Wallace, Hatfield appealed to the Circuit court, and that court also giving its judgment for Wallace. Hatfield appealed to this court.
The action was for a forcible detainer. The facts of the case as agreed on by the parties are these: that Wallace some few years since made an improvement upon public lands in Morgan county, to which he had no claim save that of occupancy, and the value of his improvement thereon, (the land…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Pentz v. KuesterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Ray v. BlackmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
- Dupas v. WassellU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Arkansas · 1870
- Kelly v. ClancyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1884
- Glenn v. CaldwellMississippi Supreme Court · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.