City of Marshfield v. Haggard, 45541
| Decision Date | 08 April 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,No. 45541,45541,1 |
| Parties | CITY OF MARSHFIELD, Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Beulah HAGGARD, Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
James H. Keet, Springfield, for appellant. Homer D. Wampler, Jr., Springfield, John Hosmer, Marshfield, of counsel.
Roy Miller, Marshfield, for respondent.
Plaintiff, a municipal corporation in Webster County, Missouri, filed this suit against the defendant Beulah Haggard for the purpose of obtaining possession of land 50 feet in width and 260 feet in length, claiming the land to be a part of Burford Street in said municipality. The defendant Beulah Haggard filed an answer wherein she alleged that she was the owner in fee of 'Block Five (5), Kentucky Row, Second Addition to the City of Marshfield, Missouri,' and that plaintiff City did not own any interest in said block. Plaintiff, as well as defendant, asked that the court try and determine title in and to the land in dispute. As we shall see later in this opinion, the real dispute was not title but as to the true south boundary line of Block 5. The trial court found for plaintiff City as to this issue and the defendant appealed.
Plaintiff filed no brief in this court but did file a motion to transfer this case to the Springfield Court of Appeals on the theory that this court does not have appellate jurisdiction of this case. The question is whether title to real estate is involved. We have come to the conclusion that title to real estate is not involved on this appeal. While it is true that both parties asked the court to try and determine title, that question passed out of the case in the following manner: After defendant filed an answer claiming to be the owner in fee of all of Block 5, plaintiff filed what is called an 'Agreement to Confess Judgment' wherein the City disclaimed any interest in Block 5. Pursuant to an agreement and stipulation, the trial court entered a judgment on October 8, 1954, in favor of the defendant adjudging the defendant to be the owner in fee of Block Five (5), Kentucky Row, and that plaintiff had no interest therein.
The parties then stipulated 'that in order to determine the true lines and boundaries to the property involved, * * * the Court may designate a competent surveyor * * * for the purpose of determining and establishing the true lines and boundaries of said property.' It was further stipulated that if such survey was satisfactory to all concerned, then for the purpose of this case, the lines so established would be considered correct. It was further stipulated that if such survey was not satisfactory, then 'each side in this cause of action may select and employ a competent surveyor' to make a survey and that 'the majority findings' should prevail for the purpose of the case.
It was shown by the record that defendant was not satisfied with the survey made by ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Allen v. Smith
...the present-day current of authoritative judicial opinion would lodge this appeal with us, we retain jurisdiction. Cf. City of Marshfield v. Haggard, Mo., 300 S.W.2d 419; Ashauer v. Peer, 346 Mo. 218, 139 S.W.2d 991. It is apparent that in the instant case the court decreed reformation of t......
-
Grimes v. Armstrong
...troublesome. Ordinarily, title is not involved where there is merely a dispute over the location of a boundary line. City of Marshfield v. Haggard, Mo., 300 S.W.2d 419. Here, however, the real controversy involves a specific 34-foot strip of ground; plaintiffs and defendant each claimed, re......
-
Klaar v. Lemperis, 45410
...been heretofore described, we would not have appellate jurisdiction, as title to real estate would not be involved. City of Marshfield v. Haggard, Mo.Sup., 300 S.W.2d 419. However, as we understand the pleadings and evidence, the actual dispute concerns a triangular tract of land (containin......
-
Brotherton v. City of Jackson
...upon the Supreme Court, Albi v. Reed, Mo., 281 S.W.2d 882, 1. c. 885. A case similar to the instant case is that of the City of Marshfield v. Haggard, Mo., 300 S.W.2d 419. In that case plaintiff, a municipal corporation in Webster County, Missouri, filed suit against defendant Beulah Haggar......