Hodge v. Bishop

Citations

• 96 Kan. 419
• 151 P. 1105
• 1915 Kan. LEXIS 396

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>Action for Rents — Contract between Father and Children for Possession — Equitable Title — Counterclaim, Improperly Rejected. In an action to recover rent for the use of land the petition alleged that the plaintiff was the owner of the land and that the defendant was a tenant holding over under an oral lease. The defendant answered the claim for rent, asserted that upon a proper accounting nothing would be found to be due, but expressed a willingness and desire to pay any balance which might be found against him. The defendant further answered to this effect: The plaintiff, who was the defendant’s father-in-law, offered the land to the defendant and his wife to take, improve, and make their home, the plaintiff intending the land for his daughter. Rent was to be paid to the plaintiff during his natural life. A certain rent was reserved for the first two years, which was then to be reduced for the future. The defendant and his wife accepted the plaintiff’s offer, moved on the land, have ever since occupied it as their home, and have placed improvements upon it to the value of from $3500 to $5000. The prayer was that the defendant’s wife be made a party, that the court determine the true character of the contract with the plaintiff and his wife, .that his wife be adjudged to have the equitable title to the land, and that the plaintiff be required to carry out the contract in which such title originated. The reply denied the claims of the answer and insisted upon a naked lease to the defendant. Held, the answer presented a proper counterclaim within1 the meaning of sections 97 and 98 of the civil code, which should have been adjudicated.</p>