General
VESEY et al. v. SEAWALL et al.; CRAWFORD et al. v. SAME
65 F. 398·United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·1895
Before TAFT and LURTON, Circuit Judges, and SEVERENS, District Judge.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
VESEY et al. v. SEAWALL et al. CRAWFORD et al. v. SAME.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
January 8, 1895.)
Nos. 151 and 152.
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio.
Mills Gardner and Humphrey Jones, for plaintiffs in error.
Matthews & Cleveland, for defendants in error.
Before TAFT and LURTON, Circuit Judges, and SEVERENS, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — TAFT, Circuit Judge.]
TAFT, Circuit Judge.
As in these cases the same question is presented as that just now discussed, the same order must be made, reversing the case so far as partition proceedings are concerned, and affirming the judgment in ejectment. See opinion in Klever v. Seawall (No. 150) 65 Fed. 393.