Skidmore v. Pittsburg, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway Co.
Cases that cite this one
6 later published cases cite this decision.
- D. A. C. Uranium Co. v. Benton (United States District Court for the District of Colorado 1956)
- Consolidated Mercantile Industries, Inc. v. Hirsch (New York Supreme Court 1950)
- Tebbs v. Union Realty Corp. (District Court, District of Columbia 1923)
- Poultney v. Emerson (Md. 1912)
- Brown v. Barker (Okla. 1912)
- Skidmore v. Pittsburg, C. & St. LR Co. (Supreme Court of the United States 1884)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court. He stated the facts in the.foregoing language and continued : •
■ ’ The judgment "below was clearly right. The Columbus, Chicago &, Indiana Central Company was, in equity, the owner of the property when the lease was made and when the Pittsburg, Cincinnati & St. Louis Company went into possession under it. The deed executed in February, 1872, pursuant to the contract of purchase, converted the equitable title of the Columbus, Chicago & Indiana Central Company into a legal title, which at once, by operation of law, inured to the benefit of the Pittsburg, Cincinnati & St. Louis Company under .its lease. All the rights of William B. Skidmore, as against1 the property, accrued long after those of tho Pitts-burg, Cincinnati &. St. Louis Company and are subject to tho title of that company. Such being the case, it is entirely unnecessary to inquire whether the Skidmores acquired a valid title to the property as against the Columbus, Chicago & Indiana Central Company. The Pittsburg, Cincinnati & St. Louis Company is entitled to the possession, whether that title be good or bad.
The judgment is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.