Skip to main content
E.D. Oklahoma· 3/4/1911

Taylor v. Anderson

Citations

  • 197 F. 383
  • 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4817

Syllabus

<p>1. Ejectment (§ 65*) — Complaint—Requisites.</p> <p>Comp. Laws Okl. 1909, § 6122, provides that, in an action to recover real property, it shall he sufficient if defendant states in his petition that he has the legal or equitable estate therein and is entitled to possession thereof, describing the property as required by section 5667, and that defendant unlawfully deprives him of possession; it being unnecessary to state how plaintiff’s estate or ownership is derived. Section 5667 provides that the land shall he described with such certainty as will enable an officer holding an execution to identify it. Ifelcl that, while plaintiff in ejectment must recover on the strength of his own title, and not on the weakness of his adversary’s, it is not necessary for him to suggest in his declaration how his estate or ownership was derived.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Ejectment, Cent. Dig. §§ 165-174; Dec. Dig. § 65.*]</p> <p>2. Courts (§ 299*) — Federal Courts — Jurisdiction—Ejectment.</p> <p>Where plaintiff in ejectment to recover certain lands, not only described the same, but unnecessarily deraigned Ms title through an Indian allotment, and alleged that it was .subject to Act Cong. July 1, 1902, c. 1362, 32 Stat. 641, such allegation did not justify an inference that eon1 struetion of the act of Congress would be necessarily involved in the action ; and hence, on demurrer to the bill, such allegation was insufficient to show federal jurisdiction on that ground.</p> <p>]Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. § 841; Dee. Dig. § 299.*</p> <p>Jurisdiction of cases involving federal questions, see notes to Bailey v. Mosher, 11 C. C. A. 308; Montana Ore-Purch. Co. v. Boston & M. C. O. & S. Min. Co., 35 C. C. A. 7; Barnhart v. Switzler, 105 C. C. A. 262.]</p> <p>3. Courts (§ 391*) — Federal _ Courts — Federal Question — United States Supreme Court — Review'.</p> <p>Where ejectment is brought to recover possession of certain Indian land in a proper st

Judges: Campbell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.