Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Citation
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Parent Document
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1902-02-18
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8296427/leet-v-gratz/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (42)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Full Text
502 chars“It is contended by plaintiff that tbe existence of tbe judgment in ejectment in favor of Mrs. Throckmorton, together with plaintiff’s admission that she has title to one-half the land, is sufficient to entitle him to a substantial recovery, notwithstanding he bad not been evicted. Such contention is not tbe law. ' Eor be may never be disturbed in his exclusive possession. He may bold adversely to Mrs. Throckmorton and thereby acquire the title by reason of a possession which Ms grantor gave him.”