Citation network
Stebbins Vs. Duncan
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 05, 1883
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 32 (1883) U.S. Supreme Court Stebbins v. DuncanSearch
-
U.S. 32 (1883) Stebbins v. DuncanSearch
-
to no decision of the Supreme Court of Illinois where a different rule has been announced. In the case of Milliken v. MartinSearch
-
the court in the fire mentioned. It was therefore competent for the plaintiffs to prove its contents. Thus, in Riggs v. TaylorSearch
-
from Dunbar to Prout was executed, a deed is valid as between the parties to it without being acknowledged. Semple v. MilesSearch
-
Scammon 315. See also McConnell v. ReedSearch
-
by law to establish the execution of the deed was by proof of the handwriting of the witnesses to the deed. Clark v. CourtneySearch
-
Adams v. KerrSearch
-
lost, its contents cannot be proved except after proof of the death of the witness whose testimony it contained. Stout v. CookSearch
-
Aulger v. SmithSearch
-
miles distant from the place of trial, proof of the contents of their deposition would have been admissible. Burton v. DriggsSearch
-
to state his objection specifically, and in a proceeding for error he is confined to the objection so taken. Burton v. DriggsSearch
-
Dunbar named in the patent for the lands in controversy. In any case, slight proof of identity is sufficient. Nelson v. WhittallSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Warren v. AndersonSearch
-
this case was ample. In tracing titles, identity of names is prima facie evidence of identity of persons. Brown v. MetzSearch
-
Cates v. LoftusSearch
-
Gitt v. WatsonSearch
-
Balbie v. DonaldsonSearch
-
Bogue v. BigelowSearch
-
Chamblee v. TarboxSearch
-
Tex. 139. See also Sewell v. EvansSearch
-
Roden v. RydeSearch
-
See Hurd's Revised Statutes, 1880, page 271, sec. 31. It was held by the Supreme Court of Illinois in Reed v. KempSearch
-
and the record will operate as constructive notice to subsequent purchasers and creditors. See also Choteau v. JonesSearch
-
Martin v. DrydenSearch
-
Gilman 213. And in Cabeen v. BreckenridgeSearch
-
in removing, and which the party has the right to inspect, may be proved by a duly authenticated copy. Saxton v. NimmsSearch
-
Thayer v. StearnsSearch
-
Dunning v. RoomeSearch
-
Dudley v. GraysonSearch
-
Bishop v. ConeSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Stebbins v. DuncanSearch
-
of Milliken v. MartinSearch
-
Riggs v. TaylorSearch
-
Semple v. MilesSearch
-
McConnell v. ReedSearch
-
Clark v. CourtneySearch
-
Stout v. CookSearch
-
Nelson v. WhittallSearch
-
Brown v. MetzSearch
-
Sewell v. EvansSearch
-
Reed v. KempSearch
-
Choteau v. JonesSearch
-
Cabeen v. BreckenridgeSearch
-
Saxton v. NimmsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial