Kelley v. Morrell
Decision Date | 01 February 1887 |
Citation | 29 F. 736 |
Parties | KELLEY and another v. MORRELL. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota |
Pierce & George, for complainants.
Chas D. Kerr, for defendant.
This is a bill in form for a partition of real property. The complainants claim an undivided one-third of the real estate described, and allege that the defendant owns the remaining two-thirds. The defendant in his answer claims he is the owner of the entire property. His title to the one-third rests on a sale by the guardian of non-resident minors ordered by the probate court of Morrison county, Minnesota and made pursuant to such license on January 17, 1857, and confirmed February 2d following. A deed was executed and delivered to the purchaser, February 17th. The complainants' title is traced through Dorothy J. Sturgis the mother of Sarah J. Kelley, and through her sister and a brother. To sustain the complainants' title, an attack is made upon the proceedings of the probate court appointing the guardian, and subsequent proceedings resulting in the sale of the minors' interest in the property.
The evidence introduced to show the appointment of a guardian is the following record:
Copy of the bond filed in the probate court by William Sturgis, guardian of the estate of Jenette A., Sarah Jane, and John K. Sturgis:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fiehe v. R.E. Householder Co.
...That situation might have presented a case of error available on direct attack, but it does not render the sale void. See Kelley v. Morrell (C. C.) 29 F. 736. original judgment of this court reversing the judgment of the trial court is hereby vacated, and the judgment of the trial court is ......
-
Murray v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.
...(C. C.) 169 F. 431, George T. Smith Middlings Purifier Co. v. McGroarty, 136 U. S. 237, 10 S. Ct. 1017, 34 L. Ed. 346, and Kelley v. Morrell (C. C.) 29 F. 736, are easily distinguishable, nor can they make a rule with reference to this matter different from that announced The allegations of......
-
Eaves v. Mullen
...44 P. 1079. J. V. Cabell, J. A. Bass and Cottingham & Bledsoe, for defendant in error.--Citing: Davis v. Caruthers, 22 Okla. 323; Kelly v. Morrel, 29 F. 736; Calloway v. Nicholas, 47 Tex. 331; Whiteman v. Fisger, 74 Ill. 152; Benson v. Benson, 70 Ind. 258; Newbald v. Schlens, 66 Md. 589; Ha......
-
Mosby v. Gisborn
...presumed that he had directed it as it was given and that he had ratified and approved it. Van Fleet on Coll. Attack, sec. 835. Kelly v. Morrell, 29 F. 736; Gronfier v. Puymirol, 29 Cal. Nothing is now better settled, and it is universally held upon a bill filed which is an original bill in......