Staats v. Bigelow

9 D.C. 367
CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals
DecidedSeptember 15, 1875
StatusPublished

This text of 9 D.C. 367 (Staats v. Bigelow) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Staats v. Bigelow, 9 D.C. 367 (D.C. 1875).

Opinion

By the Court :

After having made a judicial record that his indebtedness had been fully paid, and that he had no further right of incumbrance upon the property, Staats is estopped from setting up a claim of prior title against a bona fide subsequent incumbrancer. If the fraudulent means by which he was induced to release the trust-deed under which he claimed were known to Mattingly, he should have averred and proved it. But there is no attempt of the kind. Indeed, it is admitted that Mattingly had no notice of the fraud practiced upon Staats; he is therefore in the position of an innocent purchaser, and the decree in favor of his assignees must be affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 D.C. 367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/staats-v-bigelow-dc-1875.