Burgess v. Hixon

Citations

• 75 Kan. 201
• 88 P. 1076
• 1907 Kan. LEXIS 40

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Estoppel — Conduct. Whenever a man with notice or means of knowledge of the facts and of his rights remains silent for a long period of time and abstains from impeaching a proceeding devesting him of the right to obtain the title to land, so that another man is induced to believe the proceeding has been acquiesced in as valid and acting upon such belief is induced to purchase the property and expend money in its improvement, the proceeding becomes unimpeachable in equity, whatever its original character may have been.</p> <p>2. -School-land Purchaser Estopped to Impeach Forfeiture Proceedings. The foregoing rule of equitable estoppel applied against a purchaser of school-land whose contract the state attempted to forfeit and who afterward sought to recover the land from a subsequent purchaser.</p>