Hihn v. Peck
HIHN v. PECKs.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Joseph G. Baldwin (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Baldwin
Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court Cope, J. concurring.
Bill for partition, and for injunction against cutting timber trees by the defendants. The defendants being tenants in common had a right to the enjoyment of the common estate, and to cut timber and use or dispose of it, at least, to an extent corresponding to their share of the estate. No insolvency is averred ; nor that they are exceeding this share, nor any other facts which entitle them to this injunction. It is not necessary to decide whether these facts as to insolvency and excessive use of the timber would entitle the plaintiffs to the relief they seek. It is certain that upon this bill they are not so entitled.
Order granting injunction reversed, the injunction dissolved, and cause remanded.
Cited by
- Garibaldi v. Garibaldi Civ. 948 · 1968-07-12
- Graybiel v. Burke Civ. 8381 · 1954-03-29
- McCord v. Oakland Quicksilver Mining Co. · 1883-08-31