Kenner v. Decatur County Rochdale Coöperative Ass'n

123 P. 739, 87 Kan. 293, 1912 Kan. LEXIS 131
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedMay 11, 1912
DocketNo. 17,450
StatusPublished

This text of 123 P. 739 (Kenner v. Decatur County Rochdale Coöperative Ass'n) 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
Kenner v. Decatur County Rochdale Coöperative Ass'n, 123 P. 739, 87 Kan. 293, 1912 Kan. LEXIS 131 (kan 1912).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

We are unable to find any point raised by the appeal which is not concluded by the findings of fact made by the court. As to the personal liability of Fleming, the findings show that he had no interest in the note, and signed it for the association as manager. Oral evidence was admissible' to show [294]*294that it was the obligation of the company and not his own. (Grocer Co. v. Lackman, 75 Kan. 34, 88 Pac. 527.) The evidence sustains the finding that the chattel mortgage was not given in fratíü of creditors, and the court properly discharged the attachment. We do not attach much importance .to the fact that Fleming urged his friends and others not to bid against him at the sale. Although he had been acting as manager of the store for the mortgagees, it appears that he had been, discharged and that he had nothing to do with the conduct of the sale. In view of all we can gather from the record, he had a right to buy at the sale as cheaply as possible. He was the only unsecured creditor; he had lost his fortune in the transaction by which he sold the business to the association; he had voluntarily waived his claim at the time the stock was mortgaged to the other creditors; and, apparently, he thought he saw a chance to recoup some of his loss if he could purchase the remnant of the stock at the public sale at a reasonable price. He made no bid personally, and the evidence does not conclusively show, nor is there a finding, that he was in fact interested in the purchase. The conclusions of law are sustained by the findings, and the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Western Grocer Co. v. Lackman
88 P. 527 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
123 P. 739, 87 Kan. 293, 1912 Kan. LEXIS 131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kenner-v-decatur-county-rochdale-cooperative-assn-kan-1912.