Court Opinion

ID: 9585165
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:57:06.596048+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:33:28.941860
License: Public Domain

The following memorandum was filed May 3, 1955 :
Gehl, J.
(on motion for rehearing). To the end that we be not misunderstood, one statement contained in our opinion should be withdrawn. The statement (p. 126), “the interest must, of course, be an enforceable, legal one” taken out of context and standing alone, may be construed as holding that the interest in land which is to be cut off by application of the doctrine of res judicata must be an enforceable, legal one. The rule intended to be expressed is actually contained in a statement preceding that quoted above, “ ‘an interest in land comprehends . . . every kind of claim to land which can form the basis of a property right’ ” and the statement following the quotation, “the effect of the judgment rendered in the prior action must be limited to the title or right of plaintiff as it then stood.” To avoid the possibility of confusion, the statement referred to is withdrawn.
By the Court. — Motion denied without costs.