HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0342 and id is 1 raw text is: TYLER V. MAGWIRE.
Syllabus.
title to the land in controversy is in the appellee, and that-
there is no error in the record.
DECREE AFFIRMED IN EACH CASE.
NOTE.
WARNER V. JOY.
No. 327.
THE decree in this case (like the preceding one, an appeal
from the District of Kansas) was also affirmed; Mr. Justice
CLIFFORD (who delivered the judgment of the court) observing,
that it was clear that such a decree must be given, on an appli-
cation of the principles adopted and the reasons given in the
case just decided; as the pleadings were substantially the same
ad in it, and there vas a stipulation of the parties that the court
might take and determine the demurrer- filed upon the agree-
ments made in that case and without further argument.
So, too, judgment was here affirmed on a w'it of error (No.
328) to the same district, in a suit of ejectment by Toy against
Warner for these same lands, where judgment had been given
in favor of Joy; Air. Justice CLIFFORD, who delivered the judg-
ment of the court, saying that the questions presened for de-
cision were in all respects the same as those presented and
decided in Holden v. Joy; and that the court, without hesita-
tion, decides that theititle of the plaintiff is complete, and that
he is entitled to judgment for the recovery of the possession of
the premises in controversy.
TYLER V. MAGWIRE.
The Supreme Court of the State of Missouri, on appeal, dismissed a peti-
tion which sought to have the title to lands held by the defendant, under
a patent from the United States, divested, and vested in the complainant.
From this decree of dismissal a writ of error brought up the case under
the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act, the complainant claiming
the land under a former patent from the United States.
Dec. 1872.]](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ussccases0342&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)