Mitchell v. Armstrong Capital Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction where defendant to forcible detainer action pleaded that deed under which plaintiff claimed title was void
• holding that genuine issue regarding title existed, and trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, where defendant to forcible detainer action pleaded that deed under which plaintiff claimed title was void
• holding that trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction where defendant to forcible detainer action pleaded that deed under which plaintiff claimed title was void
• holding that trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction where defendant to forcible detainer action pleaded that deed under which plaintiff claimed title was void
• holding that genuine issue regarding title existed, and trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, where defendant to forcible detainer action pleaded that deed under which plaintiff claimed title was void
• holding that genuine issue regarding title existed, and trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, where defendant to forcible detainer action pleaded that deed under which plaintiff claimed title was void

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).