Dyer v. Johnson
Citations
- 109 Kan. 338
- 198 P. 944
- 1921 Kan. LEXIS 137
Syllabus
<p>Syllabus by the court.</p> <p>1. Ruling on Demurrer — Time in Which to Appeal. A trial court’s ruling on a demurrer to a petition is not subject to review when not appealed from within six months.</p> <p>2. Appeal — Insufficient Specifications of Error. A specification of error that the trial court admitted improper evidence, without some showing - as to what the improper evidence consisted of, presents no question for review.</p> <p>3. Deed — Absolute in Form — Parol Evidence to Show Deed to Be an Equitable Mortgage. The rule followed that parol evidence is admissible to prove that a warranty deed absolute in form was an equitable mortgage to secure the repayment of purchase money.</p> <p>4. Same — Findings Supported by Evidence. The evidence was sufficient • to support the trial court’s findings of fact.</p> <p>5. Trial — Conclusions of Lem. The trial court’s conclusions of law were necessitated by the findings of fact.</p> <p>6. Same — Judgment—Motion for New Trial. The judgment was correct, and the motion for a new trial was properly overruled.</p> <p>7. Deed — Absolute Deed in Form — Equitable Mortgage. The plaintiff solicited the defendant for money to purchase a farm in behalf of a friend, and to take a mortgage - on the farm for the full amount of the purchase price, as she had done on a similar occasion for the plaintiff many years before. She declined, giving reasons for not following her former action, but offered to furnish the money and take the title in herself, and to put plaintiff’s friend in possession of the farm under a lease with an option to purchase, if plaintiff would look after the matter for her, and upon his promise to protect her investment and take the land himself if his friend failed to do so. This agreement was made; defendant purchased the farm, and plaintiff’s friend went into possession. The latter defaulted in his payments; these Were made good by plaintiff, and he took over the farm and the lease option by assignment, and conti
Judges: Dawson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Hoyt v. Union National Bank of WichitaSupreme Court of Kansas· 1924-01-12· cited 27×
- King v. StephensSupreme Court of Kansas· 1923-05-12· cited 20×
- Tannahill v. Depositors Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of Kansas· 1922-01-07· cited 11×
- Kerr v. CarsonSupreme Court of Kansas· 1931-06-06· cited 8×
- Berger v. BierschbachSupreme Court of Kansas· 1968-07-13· cited 7×
- Kolar v. EckhardtSupreme Court of Kansas· 1925-11-07· cited 7×
- Duncan v. EssarySupreme Court of Kansas· 1964-06-06· cited 5×
- Republic Mutual Fire Insurance v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Kansas· 1929-06-08· cited 5×
- State Reserve Bank v. GrovesSupreme Court of Kansas· 1928-04-07· cited 4×
- In Re KAR Development Associates, L.P.D. Kansas· 1994-08-05· cited 2×
- Clark v. HoweSupreme Court of Kansas· 1926-06-12· cited 2×
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Boam v. CohenSupreme Court of Kansas· 1915-01-09· cited 15×
- Hubbard v. CheneySupreme Court of Kansas· 1907-07-05· cited 14×
- Root v. WearSupreme Court of Kansas· 1916-06-10· cited 14×
- Lecomte v. PennockSupreme Court of Kansas· 1900-01-06· cited 11×
- Slimmer v. RiceSupreme Court of Kansas· 1916-11-11· cited 11×
- Stratton v. RotrockSupreme Court of Kansas· 1911-03-11· cited 6×
- Winsor v. WinsorSupreme Court of Kansas· 1908-05-09· cited 4×
- Saylor v. CrookerSupreme Court of Kansas· 1913-03-08· cited 4×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.