Central Kansas Loan & Investment Co. v. Chicago Lumber Co.
| Decision Date | 06 July 1894 |
| Citation | 37 P. 132,53 Kan. 677 |
| Parties | CENTRAL KANSAS LOAN & INV. CO. v. CHICAGO LUMBER CO. et al. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Where a judgment against several defendants is brought up to the supreme court for review, and it appears that a modification or reversal will affect a defendant who has not been made a party, the proceeding in error will be dismissed.
Error from district court, Kingman county;
Action by the Central Kansas Loan & Investment Company against the Chicago Lumber Company and others. To a judgment against the defendant Stout, in favor of the Chicago Lumber Company plaintiff brings error. Dismissed.
Hay & Hay, for plaintiff in error.
W. E. Stanely, for defendant in error.
The plaintiff in error brought an action to foreclose mortgages executed by Hiram Stout and wife upon lots situated in the city of Kingman. The Chicago Lumber Company and eight other parties, who claimed an interest in the premises, were made defendants; and the lumber company, in an answer and cross petition, set up a lien for building material which was contracted for by Stout prior to the execution of the mortgages. The Stouts answered, alleging that a great part of the mortgage debt was usurious and without consideration and, further, that the plaintiff was not the owner and holder of the notes. They also replied to the answer and cross petition of the Chicago Lumber Company, denying the averments which it contained, and alike reply was made to the answer and cross petition of the contractor, George Keys. When the trial was had, the Stouts appeared, and contested the claims of the investment company, the Chicago Lumber Company, and of Georg e Keys, all of whom were represented by attorneys. The result was a recovery of a judgment against the Stouts, in favor of the Chicago Lumber Company, for $1,519.52, a judgment for the amount claimed by the investment company, and it was further decided that the judgment for the lumber company was a first lien upon the mortgaged property, and that the mortgage debt of plaintiff was a second lien, and the other parties were barred and foreclosed of any right, title, or interest in the premises. The plaintiff excepted, and brings the case here for review, but the Chicago Lumber Company is the only defendant that has been made a party to the proceedings in this court. Hiram Stout and his wife, as well as the defendant Keys, filed answer, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Evans v. Cheyenne Cement Stone and Brick Company
...(Vaught v. Bank, (Okl.) 111 P. 214; Strange v. Crismon, 22 Okl. 841, 98 P. 937; Board v. Lemley, (Okl.) 101 P. 109; Loan Co. v. Lumber Co., 53 Kan. 677, 37 P. 132; Paving Co. v. Botsford, (Kan.) 31 P. 1106; Co. v. Bank, 56 Kan. 49, 42 P. 321.) In this court it has been held that where an ap......
-
Richardson v. Thompson
...135 Ind. 42, 34 N. E. 810; Elliott, App. Proc. 138; Mortgage Co. v. Lowe, 53 Kan. 39, 35 Pac. 829;Central Kansas Loan & Investment Co. v. Chicago Lumber Co., 53 Kan. 677, 37 Pac. 132;Hyde Park Inv. Co. v. First Nat. Bank, 56 Kan. 49, 42 Pac. 321. There can be no doubt that Boswell R. Wiles ......
-
Richardson v. Thompson
... ... v. Dundee Mortgage & Trust Investment Co. 88 Ind. 139, ... was a suit to foreclose a ... v ... Lowe, 53 Kan. 39, 35 P. 829; Central Kansas Loan & Investment Co. v. Chicago Lumber ... ...
-
Grant v. Reed
... ... Protzman v. Palmer, supra, White v. Central Mutual ... Ins. Co., 149 Kan. 610, 88 P.2d 1041; Loan Co. v. Chicago ... Lumber Co., 53 Kan. 677, 37 ... 1031 ... See, ... also, Investment Co. v. First National Bank, 56 Kan ... 49, 53, ... ...