The Advocate and news., 1897-12-29
Per Curiam.

E6F Curlhms
The only question necessary TO- be con-
sldered In this case is the motion Of the
defendant in error to dismiss the proceed
lngs In error for the reason that all the
necessary parties are not In court. No
service was procured or attempted to be
procured, so far as the record discloses.
upon Thomas w. Shreve, the purchaser of
the property at the sale asked to be set
aside, and the assignee Of the judgment
in the controversy. So far as 1t appears
from the record, Mr.. Shreve Is the only
party whose interests would be preiudi-
ctally affected by reversal Of the order
as prayed for, and In his absence this
court has no authority to consider the
same Where the party chiefly interested
adversely to the plaintiff In error Is not
made a party to the proceedings in this
court by summons or otherwise, and more
than year has expired after the rendi-
ton OF the judgment complained Of, the
petition in error must be dismissed"
tSteele & Walker v. Baum, 81 Kas. 1861.
The motion to dismiss will be sustained and
these proceedings In error dismissed at
the costs Of the plaintiff in error.
Attest: w. H. THOMPSON,
[Seal.l Clerk.
Kansas Court of Appeals, Northern De-
partment, Eastern Division.
No. 278
Moses Mosler and william Mosler, partners
under the firm name and style of the
Mosler Safe Company, plaintiffs In error,
The State Bank of Perry, defendant in
error.
Error from the District Court of Jefferson
County.
Syllabus. Wells, j.
receiver of an insolvent bank duly
appointed under the banking laws to take
charge OF its assets, Is necessary party
TO proceeding in error in this court to
reverse a judgment rendered In favor OF
the bank against an interpleader who
sought to recover certain property In the
hands OF said receiver and claimed as
part of the assets Of said bank.
Filed December 1S, 1897
A true copy.
Attest: w. H. THOMPSON,
[seal.l Clerk
Kansas Court of Appeals, Northern De-
partment, Eastern Division.
No. 2S2.
The City of Topeka, plaintiff in error,
vs..
Phoebe ]. Griffey, defendant in error.
Error from Shawnee County District Court
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. McElrOy, j.
/. The verdict and judgment are sup
ported by competent evidence, and the
trial court committed no error In the ad-
mission of incompetent testimony which
could affect the substantial rights of the
plaintiff in error, The case was submit
| ted upon the evidence of the plaintiff,
which stands uncontradicted as to the fact
and extent Of the injury.
Filed December IS, 1897
Attest VIII. THOMPSON,
| lSeal.l Clerk.
Kansas Court of Appeals, Northern De-
partment, Eastern Division.
The Board of County Commissioners of the
County of Nemaha, plaintiff in error,
VS..
Delana ALBERT, defendant in error,
Error from Nemaha County District Court.
REVERSED.
Syllabus. McElroy, ].
! 1. The mere fact that the Board OF
| County Commissioners established rule
| that the matter of repairing bridges should
! be left to the Commissioners In whose
district the bridge was located, does not
! tend to show whether or not the chairman
! had actual notice of the defective and
| dangerous condition of the bridge: Held,
that such testimony was properly refused.
/
Q. The court did not err in refusing in
| strlctons. The question of contributory
negligence was question of fact for the
| jury.
9, Where all the evidence shows that the
county rebuilt, maintained and undertook