Puckett v. Hetzer
| Decision Date | 11 June 1910 |
| Docket Number | 16,582 |
| Citation | 82 Kan. 726,109 P. 285 |
| Parties | F. C. PUCKETT, Appellee, v. A. R. HETZER, Appellant, and JACOB BAEHLER et al., Appellees |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided January, 1910.
Appeal from Kearny district court; WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, judge.
Judgment affirmed.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
NAMES--Idem Sonans--Notice by Publication--Default Judgment. A default judgment quieting title, based upon service made by publishing a notice which states the defendant's name as Joseph Remer, is valid against Joseph Renner.
H. O Trinkle, for the appellant.
Arthur H. Shay, for the appellees.
In April, 1903, F. C. Puckett took judgment by default quieting his title to the land in controversy. Service was obtained by publication. The proceedings, including the notice, gave the defendant's name as Joseph Remer. In July, 1908, A. R. Hetzer obtained a quitclaim deed of the land from Joseph Renner, and in August following moved to vacate the judgment as void so far as it affected the interest of his grantor. The motion was denied, and Hetzer appeals.
The notice only need be considered. If the proper party were duly served other mistakes are inconsequential. Where service by publication is undertaken the notice must state the name of the party to be served, and the question is whether the name Joseph Remer, appearing in a printed notice of that character, looks enough like, and when pronounced sounds enough like, Joseph Renner to stand for the same person. Perfect orthography is not required. Perfect identity of sound is not required. Grant that there is some orthoepical standard in existence, pronunciation modeled after it will vary in different localities, with different individuals in the same locality and with the same person at different times, and practical similarity is all that can be insisted upon.
The appellant founds his argument upon a book rule that "e" has its long sound when it ends an accented syllable. From this he concludes that the name in the notice must be pronounced Re'-mer. The argument fails for these reasons: No law of syllabification is cited which prevents the letter "m" from forming a part of the first syllable of this proper name. If there be such a law the court is not bound to obey either it or the cited rule in determining the question propounded, and greater latitude is indulged in the pronunciation of proper names than in any other class of words. (State Bank v. Kuhnle, 50 Kan. 420, 31 P. 1057.) This being true, the appellant is bound to take into account the pronunciation Rem'-er.
The letters "m" and "n" are pronounced with continuous nasal tones, the only difference...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nichols v. Nichols
...defendant or his friends or acquaintances, it should not be held fatal." See, also, 20 R. C. L., page 700. In Puckett v. Hetzer, 82 Kan. 726, 109 P. 285, 136 Am. St. Rep. 127, it was held that a default judgment quieting title, based upon service made by publishing a notice which stated the......
-
State v. Dunn
...v. Witt, 34 Kan. 488, 494, 8 P. 769; The State v. Haist, 52 Kan. 35, 34 P. 453; Harrell v. Neef, 80 Kan. 348, 102 P. 838; Puckett v. Hetzer, 82 Kan. 726, 109 P. 285. There is no controversy here over surnames. Neither is it a question whether there is sufficient similarity to impart notice ......
-
Evans v. State
...Perfect identity of sound is not required. Practical similarity of sound is all that can be insisted upon. Puckett v. Hetzer (1910) 82 Kan. 726, 109 P. 285, 136 Am. St. Rep. 127. The appellant cites and relies upon Siebert v. State (1883) 95 Ind. 471, 478, in which the court refused to inst......
-
Strasser v. Ress, 34301
...injury was done to the accused thereby * * *.' See, also, Brady v. State, 122 Tex.Cr.R. 279, 55 S.W.2d 104; Puckett v. Hetzer, 82 Kan. 726, 109 P. 285, 136 Am.St.Rep. 127; Kelly v. Kuhnhausen, supra; Ordean v. Grannis, 118 Minn. 117, 136 N.W. 575, 1026, L.R.A.1915B, 1149; 65 C.J.S. Names, §......