Denton v. Daniels

77 P. 1129, 69 Kan. 850, 1904 Kan. LEXIS 351

Opinion

Per Curiam:

In this case the surety was shown to be liable, whether the revivor proceedings were good or bad. The petition was not open to the charge of duplicity merely because it disclosed all the facts. The judgment of the district court is affirmed on the authority of McCormick v. Fisher, 63 Kan. 199, 65 Pac. 223.