Young v. Teitlebaum

Supreme Court of Kansas

Young v. Teitlebaum

76 P. 1131, 69 Kan. 852, 1904 Kan. LEXIS 355

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedMay 7, 1904

DocketNo. 13,628

StatusPublished

This text of 76 P. 1131 (Young v. Teitlebaum) 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

Young v. Teitlebaum, 76 P. 1131, 69 Kan. 852, 1904 Kan. LEXIS 355 (kan 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

This was an action for a reconveyance of real property transferred by a deed which was alleged to be a mortgage, and also for an accounting. The question submitted to, and determined by, the court was whether an instrument executed and delivered by plaintiff to defendant was intended as an absolute conveyancé, or only as a mortgage to secure indebtedness. Much evidence bearing on the issue was introduced in which there were inconsistencies and some conflict, but, all together, it fairly tended to sustain the contention of the defendant, that there was a purchase and a conveyance of the land, based on a sufficient and agreed consideration. Only a general finding of the court was made, and the proof produced and in the record was sufficient to uphold the finding and the judgment.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Per Curiam:

This was an action for a reconveyance of real property transferred by a deed which was alleged to be a mortgage, and also for an accounting. The question submitted to, and determined by, the court was whether an instrument executed and delivered by plaintiff to defendant was intended as an absolute conveyancé, or only as a mortgage to secure indebtedness. Much evidence bearing on the issue was introduced in which there were inconsistencies and some conflict, but, all together, it fairly tended to sustain the contention of the defendant, that there was a purchase and a conveyance of the land, based on a sufficient and agreed consideration. Only a general finding of the court was made, and the proof produced and in the record was sufficient to uphold the finding and the judgment.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 P. 1131, 69 Kan. 852, 1904 Kan. LEXIS 355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/young-v-teitlebaum-kan-1904.