Custer v. Royse

Citations

• 110 Kan. 397
• 204 P. 995
• 1922 Kan. LEXIS 59

Syllabus

<p>syllabus by the court.</p> <p>1. Ejectment — Trial—Verdict—Trial Court Must Either Sustain the Verdict or Grant a New Trial. In an action for the recovery of real property, and for the recovery of damages sustained by its wrongful detention, where the jury returns a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for the possession of the property and for the amount of damages sustained by him by reason of its wrongful detention, judgment should be rendered on the verdict of the jury as it is returned; or, if the verdict does not meet the approval of the court, the verdict should be set aside, and a new trial should be granted.</p> <p>2. Same — Jurisdiction of Court After Verdict. In such an action as-is described in the first paragraph of this syllabus, it is error'for the court to hear additional evidence and make an additional finding of fact and an additional order after an appeal has been taken from the judgment entered on tho verdict and a supersedeas bond has been given.</p> <p>3. Same — Taxes Paid Not an Issue in the Case. In such an action as is described in the first paragraph of this syllabus, it is error for the court to render judgment in favor of the defendant for taxes paid by him where no issue is jnade by the pleadings concerning taxes and no evidence is introduced before the jury to show their payment.</p> <p>4. Contracts — Evidence—Option Contract. The option contract was properly admitted in evidence.</p> <p>5. Same — Letter Shows Acceptance of Option Contract.. The letter set out in the opinion constituted an acceptance of the option contract for the sale of real property.</p> <p>6. Same — Sale of Land — .Liquidated Damages as a Defense. A contract for the sale of real property provided for liquidated damages if the seller should fail to give good title. He afterward conveyed to another person. In an action by the contracting purchaser to recover the land and damages for its wrongful detention, the subsequent grantee as defendant cannot set up the provisio