Boyle v. Sayers

Supreme Court of Kansas

Boyle v. Sayers

102 P. 454, 80 Kan. 430, 1909 Kan. LEXIS 85

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedJune 5, 1909

DocketNo. 16,049

StatusPublished

This text of 102 P. 454 (Boyle v. Sayers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Boyle v. Sayers, 102 P. 454, 80 Kan. 430, 1909 Kan. LEXIS 85 (kan 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

James W. Boyle brought an action of ejectment against E. W. Sayers and others, who defended under a tax deed and also under a sheriff’s sale upon a mortgage foreclosure. The only tax deed shown in the record does not describe the land in controversy, but it is doubtful whether this was the deed relied on. This, however, need not be determined, for the following are the only objections made to the foreclosure proceedings, and they are insufficient as a ground of collateral attack: The affidavit made as a basis for service by publication did not describe the land, and in attempting to state that personal service of summons could not be had upon the defendants within the state omitted the word “personal”; the petition and publication notice named several defendants and several tracts of land but did not indicate that any particular defendant was interested in any particular tract more than in any other.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

James W. Boyle brought an action of ejectment against E. W. Sayers and others, who defended under a tax deed and also under a sheriff’s sale upon a mortgage foreclosure. The only tax deed shown in the record does not describe the land in controversy, but it is doubtful whether this was the deed relied on. This, however, need not be determined, for the following are the only objections made to the foreclosure proceedings, and they are insufficient as a ground of collateral attack: The affidavit made as a basis for service by publication did not describe the land, and in attempting to state that personal service of summons could not be had upon the defendants within the state omitted the word “personal”; the petition and publication notice named several defendants and several tracts of land but did not indicate that any particular defendant was interested in any particular tract more than in any other.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 P. 454, 80 Kan. 430, 1909 Kan. LEXIS 85, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boyle-v-sayers-kan-1909.