Legal Opinion

Lee v. Lee

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided March 12, 1901PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from Livingston Circuit Court. — Hon. E. J. Broaddm, Judge. (1) The court erred in finding that plaintiffs were heirs at law of Handy Lee, deceased, and entitled to an interest in this land. ,1 Bishop on M. D. & S., secs. 654 to 659; Johnson v. Johnson, 45 Mo. 595; Branch v. Walker, 102 N. Car. 32, 8 S. E. Rep. 896; State v. Harris, 63 N. Car. 1; Cantelou v. Hood, 56 Ala. 519; Harris v. Cooper, 31 H. C. Q. B. 182; Livingston v. Williams, 75 Tex. 653; Andrews v.…

Read the full summary

Appeal from Livingston Circuit Court. — Hon. E. J. Broaddm, Judge. (1) The court erred in finding that plaintiffs were heirs at law of Handy Lee, deceased, and entitled to an interest in this land. ,1 Bishop on M. D. & S., secs. 654 to 659; Johnson v. Johnson, 45 Mo. 595; Branch v. Walker, 102 N. Car. 32, 8 S. E. Rep. 896; State v. Harris, 63 N. Car. 1; Cantelou v. Hood, 56 Ala. 519; Harris v. Cooper, 31 H. C. Q. B. 182; Livingston v. Williams, 75 Tex. 653; Andrews v. Simmons, 68 Miss. 732; State v. Sapp, 10 S. C. 500; Pierce v. Eontenette, 25 La. Ann. 617; Wallace v. Kimball (Ela.), 26 L. R.…

1Opinion of the CourtValliant, J.

This is a statutory partition proceeding. Plainfiffs claim to be children and heirs of Handy Lee, t-wo of defendants are his widow and child, and the other two *55are Chaney Lee, who is the owner of an undivided half of the land, and Eobert E. Lee, her husband. The real contest is between the plaintiffs on the one side, who claim to be children of Handy Lee, deceased, and his widow Mary Ann, and Andrew Lee, her child, on the other side.

The principal facts are contained in an agreed statement from which it appears: That Handy Lee, Margaret and Mary Ann were negro slaves from birth, owned by a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Marie v. Avart's HeirsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1820
  2. Brown v. CheathamTennessee Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Overseers of the Poor of Marbletown v. Overseers of the Poor of KingstonNew York Supreme Court · 1822

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Erwin v. NolanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1920
  2. Keen v. KeenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
  3. Wiley v. HarlowSupreme Court of Missouri · 1918
  4. Barker v. HayesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
  5. Wheeler v. CampbellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API