Bryan v. Kales
| Citation | 162 U.S. 411,16 S.Ct. 802,40 L.Ed. 1020 |
| Decision Date | 13 April 1896 |
| Docket Number | No. 198,198 |
| Parties | BRYAN v. KALES |
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
This was an action of ejectment brought August 12, 1887, in the district court of the Second judicial district of the territory of Arizona, county of Maricopa, by T. J. Bryan against M. W. Kales, to recover possession of a tract of land in that county containing 160 acres. The case was tried by the court, a jury having been waived, and on December 6, 1890, judgment was entered for the defendant, whereupon the plaintiff appealed to the supreme court of the territory of Arizona. In that court the case was heard upon an agreed statement of facts, and the judgment of the district court was affirmed. 31 Pac. 517. The plaintiff then appealed to this court.
The facts, as they appear in the agreed statement, are substantially as follows:
On May 26, 1882, one Jonathan M. Bryan, who then owned the S. E. 1/4 of section 2, township 1 N., range 3 E., Gila and Salt River meridian, being the land in controversy in this action, executed to the said M. W. Kales his promissory note for the sum of $5,615, payable May 26, 1883, with interest at the rate of 1 1/2 per cent. a month, and to secure the same, on the said date, he and this wife, Vina Bryan, executed and delivered to Kales a mortgage of all the said land.
On August 29, 1883, Jonathan M. Bryan died intestate, leaving Vina Bryan, who was his wife at the time he acquired the said property, his widow and sole heir. On September 13, 1883, the said M. W. Kales filed his application for letters of administration in the probate court of the said county, wherein Jonathan M. Bryan resided at the time of his death, and in which the said land was situate, and such proceedings were had thereon that Kales was duly appointed administrator of Bryan's estate on September 24, 1883. He proceeded in the administration of the estate until December 6, 1884, when the administration was closed, and he was discharged from his trust. In such proceedings the said property was not distributed.
Kales, while he was so acting as administrator, and while he was the owner of the note and mortgage, brought an action in the district court of the territory of Arizona, by a complaint filed October 3, 1883, in which he, M. W. Kales, as plaintiff, sued himself, M. W. Kales, administrator of the estate of Jonathan M. Bryan, deceased, as defendant, asking for judgment upon the note and foreclosure of the mortgage, and for a sale of the land to satisfy the judgment. To that suit Vina Bryan was made a party defendant. On the same day a lis pendens was duly filed in the office of the county recorder of the said county. On October 3, 1883, a summons was duly issued out of the said court, and duly served upon M. W. Kales, administrator, the defendant named in the action; and on the same day a summons was duly issued and served upon the said Vina Bryan. M. W. Kales, ad inistrator, as defendant, made answer on the same day, and admitted each and every allegation of the complaint, and consented that a judgment and decree might be entered in accordance with the paryer thereof; and Vina Bryan, answering the complaint, denied any individual liability on her part to the plaintiff, admitted each and every material allegation in the complaint, in so far as the same did not imply a personal liability on her part, disclaimed all right, title, and interest in the said property in any way conflicting with the mortgage, and prayed to be dismissed.
Upon a day of the regular term of the said court, Cotober 16, 1883, the said cause came on...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wirtz v. Gordon
... ... 465; ... Haggart v. Wilczinski, 5 Cir., 143 F. 22, 26; ... Romig v. Gillett, 187 U.S. 111, 117, 23 S.Ct. 40, 47 ... L.Ed. 97; Bryan v. Kales, 162 U.S. 411, 415, 16 ... S.Ct. 802, 40 L.Ed. 1020; Burns v. Hiatt, 149 Cal ... 617, 624, 625, 87 P. 196; Raggio v. Palmtag, 155 ... ...
-
Jasper State Bank v. Braswell
...Elliott v. C. C. Slaughter Co., Tex.Civ.App., 236 S.W. 1114; Majors v. Strickland, Tex.Civ.App., 6 S.W.2d 133; Bryan v. Kales, 162 U.S. 411, 16 S.Ct. 802, 40 L.Ed. 1020; Stouffer v. Harlan, 68 Kan. 135, 74 P. 610, 64 L.R.A. 320, 104 Am.St. Rep. 396; Jaggar v. Plunkett, 81 Kan. 565, 106 P. 2......
-
Gulf Production Co. v. Continental Oil Co.
...Buckeye Refining Co. v. Kelly, 163 Cal. 8, 124 P. 536, Ann.Cas.1913E, 840; Bryan v. Kales, 3 Ariz. 423, 31 P. 517, affirmed 162 U.S. 411, 16 S.Ct. 802, 40 L.Ed. 1020; Stevenson v. Murray, 87 Ala. 442, 6 So. 301; Dorente v. Sullivan, 7 Cal. 279; Dow v. Seely, 29 Ill. 495; Liddon v. Hodnett, ......
-
Wirtz v. Gordon
... ... 441; ... Haggart v. Wilezinski, 143 F. 22, 74 C. C. A. 176; ... Gravelle v. Mortgage Co., 42 Wash. 457, 845 P. 36; ... Bryan v. Penny, 162 U.S. 419, 40 L.Ed. 1023; ... Bryan v. Brasius, 162 U.S. 415; Wright v ... Harris 221 F. 736, 40 L.Ed. 1022; Equitable Mrtge ... Harlem, 68 Kan. 135, 104 A. S. R. 396; Rogers v ... Benton, 39 Minn. 39, 12 A. S. R. 613; Robinson v ... Ryan, 25 N.Y. 320; Brown v. Kales, 162 U.S ... 411, 40 L.Ed. 1020; Bruschke v. Wright, 166 Ill 183; ... 57 A. S. R. 125; Ann. Cas. 1917D, 578 ... In the ... absence of ... ...