The advocate., 1897-04-21
REVERSED.
SYLLABUS.

REVERSED.
SYLLABUS
1. Causing deed made by a father TO his
minor children, to be recorded, Is sufficient
delivery In law TO pass the title to the infant
grantees, and subsequent destruction OF the
deed by third party will not divert the title
thus conveyed or reinvest 1t In the original
grantor.
3. The making of conveyance purporting
to convey the fee, by q life tenant, does not
work O forfeiture OF the life tenancy.
3. The conveyance Of 200 acres OF land by
father TO his four minor children, ana retain,
ing 80 acres, in contemplation OF second
marriage, and especially whore all OF the
Improvements are upon the 80 acres retained,
is not in itself fraud upon the marital
right Of o second wife.
4. The defendant In this suit could not deny
the plaintiffs assert title, and ut the same
time claim the benefit Of the life estate
created thereby TO the husband.
5. II tenant distinctly repudiates his land
lords title and asserts one In himself, the
tenants holding becomes adverse and wrong
full and entities the landlord to an action to
recover the land.
6. A homestead rlghtmay be impressed upon
lands held ss an estate for life, but such
homestead right cannot be greater In extent
than the title upon which IL rests.
z. A remainder-man has right to have
receiver appointed against the tenant for life,
who permits the estate to be sold for taxes, to
receive the rents and profits to redeem the
land from such tax sale, and such right Is not
a mere matter Of discretion Of the court and 1t
Is error to refuse 10.
8. Under the issue joined in this case, upon
the pleadings, the plaintiffs had the right to
the validity Of the title under which they
claimed the land and 1t wal error Tor the
court to refuse to make such determination.
O. In an action to recover real estate for par,
titton thereof, where the title set up Is denied
and the making and delivery OF adeed alleged
in the petition is denied, under oath, judg-
ment OF dismissal generally is bar to o sub
sequent action, having the same object in
view.
All the Judges concurring.
Attest: f VIII. GATES,
[sEALl Clerk.
Kansas Court of Appeals, Northern Depart
ment, Central Division.
The Marysville Investment Company, plaintiff
In error,
Wilhelm Holle, F. Anton Lienlen, and Wilhel-
mimic Kienlen, defendants in error.
Error from Marshall County District Court.
AFFIRMED.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT. WELLS, j.
/. An actual occupant of townsite upon
governments lands entered by the Probate
Judge under an act OF Congress approved May
28d, 1874, for the relief Of citizens Of town
upon lands Of the United States under certain
circumstances, and an act to regulate the en-
tries and disposal OF townsites, laws OF Kan
sas, 1857 and 1858, page 200, is entitled to the
possession of the portion thereof, actually oc
~ r1 nf n
Commissioners or the deed OF the Probate
Judge.
q The report OF the Commissioners and the
deed Of the Probate Judge Is conclusive and
final, unless impeached for fraud or by some
direct proceeding within reasonable time,
as to the disposition OF unOccupied lots among
the actual occupants Of said townsite, or for
their general good.
8. corporate company, such as the Pal
metto Town Company was, may be, through
| It's members acting for such corporation only,
and not In their individual right, the sole and
exclusive occupants OF said toWnslte, and
| under such circumstances the Probate Judge
should convey such townsite to such com
pany.
4. The principal question In this case being,
whether or not the deed from the Probate
Judge conveyed any title TO the grantees
therein named, the understanding and circum-
stances under which said deed was made and
accepted and the actions Of the grantees there
under, were proper subjects OF inquiry, and
any competent evidence tending to establish
the defendants claim in relation thereto was
proper.
s. If the grantees in said deed from the Pro.
bate Judge accepted the same as officers and
members OF the Palmetto Town Company
only, and afterwards for a great number OF
years held out TO the world, snd asserted that
said company was the exclusive owner Of said
property, and caused the people on said town.
site TO believe and act upon the belief that
such was the fact, they are now estopped
from claiming the title to themselves there
under.
McElroy, j., concurTing.
M&han, p. j., dissenting.
A true copy.
Attest: w. II. GATES,
raEAE1 Clark