WOODALL v. ESTABROOK et al. (two cases)

WOODALL v. ESTABROOK et al. (two cases). (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. April 2, 1921.) Nos. 1847, 1848. Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntingon; Benjamin F. Keller, Judge. Suits by Alonzo Woodall and by T. J. Woodall against George L. Estabrook and another, trustees of the Lincoln County Land Association. From decrees for respondents in each case, complainants appeal. Affirmed. E. L. Hogsett, of Huntington, W. Va. (B. E. Wilkinson, of Hamlin, W. Va., on the.brief), for appellants. Cary N. Davis, of Huntington, W. Va. (W. C. W. Renshaw, of Huntington, W. Va., J. S. Clark and H. A. McCarthy, both of Philadelphia, Pa., and Vinson, Thompson, Meek & Renshaw and Fitzpatrick, Campbell, Brown & Davis, all of Huntington, W. Va., on the brief), for appellees. Before ICNAPP and WOODS, Circuit Judges, and BOYD, District Judge. [MAJORITY — WOODS, Circuit Judge.] WOODS, Circuit Judge. These are suits in equity to have removed as a cloud on complainant’s title a paper described as a disclaimer. The instrument is the same in character as that we have considered and held to be in effect a quitclaim deed in the opinion just filed in the ejectment suit of Joseph D. Miller v. George L. Estabrook and others, 278 Fed. 144. AH the questions here made were involved in that case, and the decision in that case is conclusive of these. The result is that the decrees of the District Court must be affirmed.