Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Columbian Title & Trust Co. v. City of Tribune
See, also, Kaill v. Bell, 88 Kan. 666 , 129 Pac. 1135 ; and Getty v. City of Syracuse, 129 Kan. 106 , 281 Pac. 883 .) By applying the principle expressed in the opinions above quoted to the situation in the case at bar, we conclude the plaintiff had a right to recover notwithstanding the irregularities enumerated, and this makes it unnecessary to discuss the effect of each particular irregularity, nor do we need to approve or disapprove the third conclusion of law discussed in the briefs.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ella Busey
v.
William Stockhoff
v.
William Stockhoff
No. 17,935.
Supreme Court of Kansas.
Feb 8, 1913.
J. N. Baird, of Kansas City, for the appellants., H. L. Alden, and Junius W. Jenkins, both of Kansas City, for the appellees.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
Per Curiam:
Action in ejectment. The defendants had judgment for costs. The plaintiffs appeal.
The case is controlled by the decision just handed down in Ewing v. Nesbitt, ante, p. 708, 129 Pac. 1135, in which it is held that the statute de donis and the rule of the common law expressed therein are in full force and effect in this state, and that an estate tail is capable of being barred by a conveyance of record made by the tenant in tail. It follows therefore that the conveyance made to the defendants by Robert O’Donnell, the sole surviving tenant in tail, and his wife, Huida O’Donnell, barred the issue born and unborn of the tenants in tail as well as the donors’ reversion.
.The judgment is affirmed.