Scott v. Morning

23 Kan. 253
Supreme Court of Kansas·Decided January 15, 1880·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Every question involved in this case has been settled in this court, by decisions in, other cases.

1. As to litigating adverse claims in foreclosure cases, see Bradley v. Parkhurst, 20 Kas. 462.

2. As to agreements by a grantee to pay previously existing mortgages on the property, see Schmucker v. Sibert, 18 Kas. 105.

[254]*2543. As to a grantee’s remedies and his measure of damages in cases of breach of covenants, see Dale v. Shively, 8 Kas. 276; McKee v. Bain, 11 Kas. 569, 578.

The defendant in error also refers to the case of Parkinson v. Sherman, 74 N. Y. 88, as being a case directly in point for this case; but that volume of the New York reports has not yet been received by the state library, and therefore we have been unable to examine it.

The judgment of the court below will be affirmed.

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

Scott v. Morning, 23 Kan. 253 (kan 1880).

23 Kan. 253 (Scott v. Morning) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bolinger v. Brake
47 P. 537 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1897)