Rook v. Godfrey
Opinion
Action of forcible entry and detainer; demurrer to evidence of the plaintiffs sustained, and appeal in error by them.
[535] The action of the trial Judge was correct, for two reasons, (1) hecanse the plaintiffs failed to show that they were in the possession of the land when the defendants entered (Greer v. Wroc, 1 Sneed, 247; Elliott v. Lawless, 6 Heis., 129; Chamberlain v. Coal and Coke Co., 92 Tenn. 21), and (2) hecanse the defendants were put in possession by the Sheriff nnder writs of possession issued from the Chancery Court. Scott v. Newsom, 4 Sneed, 457.
Let the judgment be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
58 S.W. 850 (Rook v. Godfrey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.