Pennsylvania v. M'Gill

Alleghany County Court of Common Pleas

Pennsylvania v. M'Gill

1 Add. 21

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County

DecidedMarch 15, 1792

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Add. 21 (Pennsylvania v. M'Gill) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pennsylvania v. M'Gill, 1 Add. 21 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1792).

Pincite

Opinion

INDICTMENT for a misdemeanor. Boggs persuaded M'Gill to steal, and deliver to him, a conveyance for 100 acres of land executed by Henry Shaver to his son and daughter. This land was part of a larger trail, of which Shaver had been possessed, under allocation or a Virginia certificate. He intended this hundred acres as a provision for his two children; and having sold the rest to Boggs, he conveyed the location or certificate to him, that he might take a patent for the whole in his name, and took an article or bond on Boggs, to convey this hundred acres to his children, after he obtained the patent for the whole. They were convicted.

The court suggested, that it might be useful, if Boggs having the title to this land, should before sentence, execute a conveyance to the son and daughter of Shaver. He did so—and judgment was given.

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

INDICTMENT for a misdemeanor. Boggs persuaded M'Gill to steal, and deliver to him, a conveyance for 100 acres of land executed by Henry Shaver to his son and daughter. This land was part of a larger trail, of which Shaver had been possessed, under allocation or a Virginia certificate. He intended this hundred acres as a provision for his two children; and having sold the rest to Boggs, he conveyed the location or certificate to him, that he might take a patent for the whole in his name, and took an article or bond on Boggs, to convey this hundred acres to his children, after he obtained the patent for the whole. They were convicted.

The court suggested, that it might be useful, if Boggs having the title to this land, should before sentence, execute a conveyance to the son and daughter of Shaver. He did so—and judgment was given.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Add. 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pennsylvania-v-mgill-pactcomplallegh-1792.