Morancy v. Palms

Sixth Circuit

Morancy v. Palms

68 F. 64, 8 Ohio F. Dec. 544, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2840

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·Decided May 13, 1895·No. No. 234·Published

Opinion

SEVERENS, District Judge.

This is a suit in equity precisely like that of Hodge v. Palms (No. 232; just decided) 68 Fed. 61, in all material particulars. A Spanish land claim of 1790, which is the foundation of this controversy, was sold and conveyed by the original owner, one Miguel Llano, during his life. It was therefore no part of his succession which the parish court undertook to administer. The court below sustained the demurrer of the defendants, and dismissed the bill. For the reasons stated in Hodge v. Palms, we think the decree should be reversed, and the cause remanded, Avith directions to permit the defendants to answer the bill. It is so ordered.

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

SEVERENS, District Judge.

This is a suit in equity precisely like that of Hodge v. Palms (No. 232; just decided) 68 Fed. 61, in all material particulars. A Spanish land claim of 1790, which is the foundation of this controversy, was sold and conveyed by the original owner, one Miguel Llano, during his life. It was therefore no part of his succession which the parish court undertook to administer. The court below sustained the demurrer of the defendants, and dismissed the bill. For the reasons stated in Hodge v. Palms, we think the decree should be reversed, and the cause remanded, Avith directions to permit the defendants to answer the bill. It is so ordered.

Morancy v. Palms, 68 F. 64, 8 Ohio F. Dec. 544, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2840 (6th Cir. 1895).

Pincite

68 F. 64 (Morancy v. Palms) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related