Shattuck v. Belknap Savings Bank
83 P. 1116, 73 Kan. 793, 1906 Kan. LEXIS 340
Opinion
On the authority of Kelso v. Norton, 65 Kan. 778, 70 Pac. 896, 93 Am. St. Rep. 308, and Henthorn v. Security Co., 70 Kan. 808, 79 Pac. 653, this case is affirmed. Under the uncontroverted facts, the only legal right, if any, the plaintiff has in the land in question is to redeem and have an accounting for rents.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Shattuck v. Belknap Savings Bank, 83 P. 1116, 73 Kan. 793, 1906 Kan. LEXIS 340 (kan 1906).
83 P. 1116 (Shattuck v. Belknap Savings Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Kelso v. Norton
70 P. 896 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1902)
Henthorn v. Security Co.
79 P. 653 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1905)