McLean v. Bovee

24 Wis. 295
Wisconsin Supreme Court·Decided June 15, 1869·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Paiíte, J.

The defendant in this suit recovered certain premises of the plaintiff in an action for the recovery of real property. He was put in possession under the judgment, and took possession of a crop of wheat, part of which had been cut and a part of which was still uncut at the time he took the land. This action was brought to recover for this taking of the wheat, and the question is, which of the parties was entitled to it %

The authorities cited by the respondent’s counsel seem .to show, that, upon the facts here presented, the crop belonged to the defendant. It was sowed long after the suit to recover the land was begun, and there is no fact upon which the case can be taken out of the rule they establish.

By the Gourt. — The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

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

McLean v. Bovee, 24 Wis. 295 (Wis. 1869).

24 Wis. 295 (McLean v. Bovee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fruin v. Gorden (In Re Gorden)
47 B.R. 245 (W.D. Wisconsin, 1985)
Cross v. Robinson
256 P. 80 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1927)
Hartshorne v. Ingels
1909 OK 99 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1909)
Snyder v. Harding
80 P. 789 (Washington Supreme Court, 1905)
Wadge v. Kittleson
97 N.W. 856 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1903)
Collier v. Cunningham
28 N.E. 341 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1891)
McGinnis v. Fernandes
26 N.E. 109 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1890)
McGinnis v. Fernandes
32 Ill. App. 424 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1890)
Carlisle v. Killebrew
89 Ala. 329 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1889)
McCaslin v. State ex rel. Auditor
99 Ind. 428 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1885)
Rowell v. Klein
44 Ind. 290 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1873)