The Emporia Mutual Loan and Saving Association v. Atkinson, 12,261

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Kansas
Writing for the CourtPer Curiam:
Citation63 Kan. 848,66 P. 995
PartiesTHE EMPORIA MUTUAL LOAN AND SAVING ASSOCIATION v. WILLIAM ATKINSON
Decision Date07 December 1901
Docket Number12,261

66 P. 995

63 Kan. 848

THE EMPORIA MUTUAL LOAN AND SAVING ASSOCIATION
v.

WILLIAM ATKINSON

No. 12,261

Supreme Court of Kansas

December 7, 1901


Decided July, 1901.

Error from Lyon district court; W. A. RANDOLPH, judge.

Judgment reversed.

R. M. Hamer, for plaintiff in error.

Madden Bros., for defendant in error.

OPINION

[63 Kan. 849] Per Curiam:

The defendant in error sued the plaintiff in error, a building and loan association, to recover certain sums of money deposited with the latter by the former, and evidenced by certificates of deposit and written agreements of repayment. The certificates and agreements promised repayment according to a specified order of priority between the different depositors and certificate holders in the association, and the defendant's answer averred that the contract period for payment had not yet matured. Whether or not it had matured could not be told from the paper in question. A demurrer to the answer for insufficiency of facts to constitute a defense was sustained. This was manifest error. The judgment of the court below is therefore reversed, with directions to overrule the demurrer.

DOSTER, C. J., JOHNSTON, SMITH, ELLIS, JJ.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • Trowbridge v. Cunningham, 12,052
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Kansas
    • December 7, 1901
    ...of appraisement and other steps preliminary to a sale are not good. They did not render the sale void, and such irregularities cannot [63 Kan. 848] be questioned in a collateral proceeding. (Paine v. Spratley, 5 Kan. 525; Pritchard v. Madren, 31 id. 38, 2 P. 691.) The surviving wife inherit......
1 cases
  • Trowbridge v. Cunningham, 12,052
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Kansas
    • December 7, 1901
    ...of appraisement and other steps preliminary to a sale are not good. They did not render the sale void, and such irregularities cannot [63 Kan. 848] be questioned in a collateral proceeding. (Paine v. Spratley, 5 Kan. 525; Pritchard v. Madren, 31 id. 38, 2 P. 691.) The surviving wife inherit......

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