Robinson v. Nail
Court Of Appeals Of Indian Territory
Appeal from the United States Court for the Central District. Yancy Lewis, Judge. Action by J. H. Nail against McKee Robinson and another. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendancs appeal. This was an action of ejectment brought by the appel-lee, J. H. Nail, against McKee Robinson and P. H. Rogers, appellants, to recover possession of a certain lot, with the improvements thereon, situated in the town of Caddo, in the Central district of the Indian Territory.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the United States Court for the Central District. Yancy Lewis, Judge. Action by J. H. Nail against McKee Robinson and another. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendancs appeal. This was an action of ejectment brought by the appel-lee, J. H. Nail, against McKee Robinson and P. H. Rogers, appellants, to recover possession of a certain lot, with the improvements thereon, situated in the town of Caddo, in the Central district of the Indian Territory. The plaintiff in his complaint alleged that ho had purchased the premises and improvements in the year 1881 from one C. McCoy; that,…
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
1. The first error assigned by the appellants in their brief is that the trial court erred in excluding the judgment of the same court rendered at its March term, 1896, in an action of unlawful detainer, in which Joel H. Nail was plaintiff,, and McKee Robinson and Mrs. Ibbie Covington were defendants, for the possession of these same premises and improvements. Under section 3867 of Mans*512field’s Digest, which provides: “Neither the judgment nor anything in this act [forcible entry and unlawful detainer] shall bar or preclude the party injured from bringing his action of trespass or ejectment or…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Reynolds v. HillSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Tynon v. HallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908