Green v. Green

Decision Date01 January 1889
PartiesOLIVER GREEN v. HARRIET F. GREEN et al
CourtKansas Supreme Court

Error from Shawnee District Court.

ACTION by Oliver Green against Harriet F. Green and others, to set aside certain deeds which plaintiff alleged to be fraudulent as to him. Trial on February 7, 1887, and verdict and judgment for defendant James H. Easterday. The plaintiff brings the case to this court. The facts are stated in Green v. Green, 34 Kan. 740, et seq., and in the opinion, infra.

Judgment reversed.

Welch & Welch, for plaintiff in error.

Stumbaugh Arnold & Hilton, for defendant in error Easterday.

HOLT C. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

HOLT, C.:

This case has been in this court before. (34 Kan. 740.) The statement of facts therein set forth is referred to as supplementary to the following: In 1882, Oliver Green, a cripple, entered into a marriage contract with Harriet F. Wilcox, now Harriet F. Green. It appears that Oliver Green was possessed of some little amount of personal property, but had no real estate nor a fixed abode. Harriet F. Wilcox was the owner of a quarter-section of land in Shawnee county, of the value of about $ 2,500. Before their marriage they entered into a mutual agreement concerning the property of each of the parties, but it was not reduced to writing. She agreed that out of the proceeds of the farm he should be aided in his support during their married life, and if he survived her, until his death. They were married on the 31st day of August, 1882. Upon the 30th day of the same month she went to a notary and made deeds to her three daughters, giving to each of them an undivided one-third part of the farm; she left the deeds with the notary, with the direction that they were to be given to her when she might call for them, or if they were not called for before her death, they were then to be delivered to her daughters. The husband and wife lived together for nearly a year, he furnishing a large portion of the support for himself and wife from his own funds; during part of the time an unmarried daughter of his wife, and later a widowed daughter with her two children, lived with them. He furnished his wife with $ 100 to pay off a mortgage on the farm. After living together for about one year, she left him, and brought an action for divorce, which upon trial was decided adversely to her. In February, 1884, the deeds were delivered to her daughters, and they made a sale of the premises to Easterday, one of the defendants herein. In March following, all the deeds were placed on record in the office of the register of deeds of Shawnee county, Kansas. The cause was tried by the court and a jury, and the following questions were submitted to the jury, and answered:

"When were the deeds from Harriet F. Wilcox, now Green to her three daughters executed? A. August 30, 1882.

"When were the plaintiff and Harriet F. Wilcox married? A. August 31, 1882.

"Did the plaintiff, Oliver Green, consent to, or know of, at the time of his marriage to Harriet F. Wilcox, now Green, the deeds by which she conveyed all of the farm in controversy to her three daughters? A. No.

"When were the deeds of Harriet F. Wilcox to her three daughters, as referred to in the first question, delivered to them? A. A few days before they conveyed said land to Easterday, or in February, 1884."

The judgment was in favor of defendant Easterday, the wife and three daughters making default. The plaintiff, as plaintiff in error, brings the case here.

In the record it is stated that the agent of Mrs. Green sold the land to Easterday for $ 2,500; $ 1,000...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Buttz v. James
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 18 Diciembre 1915
    ... ... and the conveyance may be up pro tanto. Crawford v ... Kirksey, 55 Ala. 282, 28 Am. Rep. 704; Rhodes v ... Green, 36 Ind. 7; Perkins v. Swank, 43 Miss ... 349; Hedrick v. Strauss, 42 Neb. 485, 60 N.W. 928; ... Davis v. Ward, 109 Cal. 186, 50 Am. St ... ...
  • Fluegel v. Henschel
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 9 Abril 1898
    ... ... participant in the fraud, and the conveyance may be set aside ... pro tanto. Crawford v. Kirksey, 28 ... Am. Rep. 704; Rhodes v. Green, 36 Ind. 7; ... Perkins v. Swank, 43 Miss. 349; ... Hedrick v. Strauss, (Neb.) 42 Neb. 485, 60 ... N.W. 928; Davis v. Ward, 109 Cal. 186, 41 ... ...
  • Nix v. Wiswell
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • 21 Febrero 1893
    ...26 Wis. 50; Thomas v. Stone, Walk. Ch. 117; Stone v. Welling, 14 Mich. 514;Dresser v. Construction Co., 93 U. S. 92;Green v. Green, 41 Kan. 472, 21 Pac. Rep. 586;Wynn v. Carter, 20 Wis. 107.Counsel also cited the following cases holding that an unrecorded mortgage may be enforced against a ......
  • Security Stove & Mfg. Co. v. Sellards
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • 10 Octubre 1931
    ...the following cases: Nixon v. Cydon Lodge, 56 Kan. 298, 43 P. 236; Bush, Sheriff v. Collins, 35 Kan. 535, 11 P. 425; Green v. Green, 41 Kan. 472, 21 P. 586; Kantzer v. Southwest Home Investment Co., 128 Kan. 401, 278 P. 53. In the first case, the lien of the mortgage was held to be subordin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT