Adkins v. Moran

67 Mo. 100
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedOctober 15, 1877
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 67 Mo. 100 (Adkins v. Moran) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Adkins v. Moran, 67 Mo. 100 (Mo. 1877).

Opinion

Napton, J.

This was an action of ejectment to recover a portion of the northeast qr of Sec. 1, T. 59, R. 35, lying within certain metes and bounds recited in the petition.

[101]*101The plaintiff’s title was a deed from Walter Huffaker and wife, dated 23d February, 1871, which remised, released and forever quit-claimed the title to the seventy-three acres, more or less, described in the petition. The ■defendant relied on a sheriff’s deed, made in 1865 and duly recorded, which recited a judgment against Huffaker, an execution, levy and sale of all Huffaker’s title to the land described in it, which was “seventy acres P. N. of N. E. of. .Sec. 1, T. 59, R. 35.” The deed is dated 7th April, 1865} duly acknowledged and recorded on the 18th of April, 1865. In connection with this deed, the defendant proved by various witnesses, who lived in the neighborhood of the land in controversy, that Huffaker owned and occupied the land in dispute in 1865 ; that there were about seventy acres in it; that it was on either side of One Hundred and Two river; that since that time a tenant of defendant occupied it; that this land was in the N. E. of Sec. 1, T. 59, R. 35 ; that in 1865 the land was known in the neighborhood as the Huffaker land; that Huffaker owned no other land nearer than one or two miles from this; that this was the only tract of land ever claimed by Huffaker on this river; that it is in the northeast part of the northeast qr of section 1. The court decided that the sheriff’s deed was void for uncertainty, and gave judgment for plaintiffs, and this presents the only point in the case.

We are unable to distinguish this case from that of McPike v. Allman, (53 Mo. 551,) in which Judge Vories reviewed all the prior decisions of this court on the subject. The judgment must therefore be reversed, and the causo remanded.

The other judges concur.

Reversed,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Monroe v. Lyons
98 S.W.2d 544 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1936)
Hammond v. Johnston
93 Mo. 198 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1887)
Charles v. Patch
87 Mo. 450 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1885)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
67 Mo. 100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adkins-v-moran-mo-1877.