Phelps v. Henry & Cunningham
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Crawford Ci/remt Cowrt in Chancery. lion. B. H. Neely, Circuit Judge, presiding. The proof is that Brown and all who purchased at the auction sales, did buy by the stakes,, and with the understanding that their deeds describing the lots according to their numbers vested in them the area included within the boundaries indicated by the stakes: as in the case of the United States surveys, where the boundary lines actually run and marked by the public surveyors, are…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Crawford Ci/remt Cowrt in Chancery. lion. B. H. Neely, Circuit Judge, presiding. The proof is that Brown and all who purchased at the auction sales, did buy by the stakes,, and with the understanding that their deeds describing the lots according to their numbers vested in them the area included within the boundaries indicated by the stakes: as in the case of the United States surveys, where the boundary lines actually run and marked by the public surveyors, are to betaken and considered as the true boundaries, whether they be right or wrong. Campbell vs.. Cla/rk,. 8 Missowi Rep.…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Obief Justice WatKINS
delivered tbe opinion of tbe Court.
Henry and Cunningham, tbe complainants in tbe Court below, •exhibited their bill in chancery against tbe appellant Phelps, tbe mayor and aldermen of tbe -city of Tan Burén, Jesse Turner and 'Others, tbe object of which was to settle boundaries of certain lots in block No. 13, in Yan Burén, and to enjoin actions of tres-p^s brought, or threatened to be brought by Phelps against tbe •complainants.
It appears that, in tbe year 183V, Thompson and Drennen, who are admitted to have been the owners of the land upon which Yan Burén is…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Martin v. CoxSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Garrett v. MusgraveSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1949
- Brown v. LeeteU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1880