Case ID: kan-app_7/html/0469-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Dennison, P. J. :", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Kansas Loan and Trust Company v. The Phelps & Bigelow Windmill Company. J. T. Newman v. The Phelps & Bigelow Windmill Company.
    Nos. 169 and 281.
    
      Homestead — Sale of Husband’s Interest in. A judgment against a husband only, rendered upon the foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien against the homestead, is not void as to the husband’s interest in said homestead.
    Error from Wilson district court; L. Stillwell, judge.
    Opinion filed August 18, 1898.
    Affirmed.
    
      Fuller & Whitcomb, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      J. B. F. Cates, for defendants in error'.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Dennison, P. J. :

In these cases the attorneys for plaintiffs in error state in their brief that but two questions are to be determined by us : (1) Is a judgment rendered upon the foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien against the homestead of the defendant void when his wife is not a party to the judgment ? (2) If void, who can plead it ?

Section 9 of article 15 of the constitution of Kansas provides, that no property shall be exempt from sale for the payment of obligations contracted for the erection of improvements thereon.

The most that can be said in favor of the plaintiff in error is that the wife has an interest in the premises and that her interest has not been foreclosed.

Judgment has been rendered against the husband, and his interest in the land has been ordered sold to satisfy the lien of the defendant in error. We see no error in this.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.