davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 20,156.
John Gillies, Appellee,

George S. Linscott. Appellant.
Appeal from Leayenworth County.
Syllabus. BY the Court. Dawson, j.
l. The evidence to support allegations
By plaintiffs agent examined and found
sufficient to Justify the courts refusal to
order an. instructed verdict.
. 1t is not necessary to state all the
law of a case in one Instruction to the
Jury, and n single instruction which is
cised from its context and interpreted to
govern the entire controversy without re-
gard to other appropriate instructions
g. Where the main issue in an action to
recover the purchase price of corporate
the question of the agents fraudulent con-
duct in procuring outstanding stock In
20. .. Did the defendant tell the plain
tiff at the time of each of said purchases
that he could purchase preferred stock in
the Mahogany Lumber and Transportation
Company at hundred dollars per share?"
The jury's first answer was:
"A The evidence shows (see checks to
NJ L. & 7. Coz that defendant led plain
pafly, and worth $4,000 per share
ON motion of defendant the jury were
and specific answer to this question, and
their corrected answer was Yes"
HELD that by the aid of the first an
clear that the jury did not intend to adopt
defendants contention that he was au
and HELD also that the defendant was
not entitled to Judgment this finding.
g. The plaintiff requested the defendant,
his banker in whom he had implicit conf
deuce. to find safe investment for some
money. The defendant recommended the
preferred stock of a navigation company,
SAYING that he and his father and brothers
were Interested in the company to the ex-
tent of $30.0O0 and undertook to procure
treasury stock from the company for plain
tiff. Plaintiff gave a check for $500 pay
able to the company for eight shares of
-. roll fnF "
Later the defendant procured twenty addi-
tIonal shares for plaintiff under the same
circumstances aud which We're also paid
81 the company The company never re-
cefved the checks or their proceeds did
PLAINTIFFS money go to enhance the cor
Dorate capital or assets. The checks were
cashed by defendant without endorsement
and the proceeds disposed of by defendant,
and the corporate stock which defendant
Drocured and delivered TO plaintiff was
outstanding stock acquired from defend
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 20.1o0.
c. H. Rickert, Appellee,

vs..
G. Porter Craddock. ct al, Appellants.
Appeal from Morton County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus BY the Court. Porter ].
1. The burden of proof rests upon him
who asserts that an attorney employed to
collect upon a note had authority
to compromise or settle his clients claim
for less than the amount due thereon, or
who seeks to establish the fact that the
client ratified such compromise settle
ment.
.. Upon the facts stated in the opinion
it is held that the trial court rightly di-
rected verdict for defendants. and that
the evidence was not sufficient to show
ratification by the client Of the action
of his attorney in accepting n compromise
OF settlement of his claim upon note
placed in the attorneys hands for collec-
ton.
All the justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: y. A. VALENTINE,
ISeaI.l Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13

prayed for cancellation of the deed, for a
decree awarding her a third interest In
the land. and for partition and rents and
profits. Held, that a demurrer to such a
petition was properly sustained
Ali the Justices concurriug.
true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
(Seal.l Clerk SUPREME Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 1913.
T. B. Shannon, Appellee,


Albert Abrams, ct al, Appellants.
Appeal from Allen County.
AFFIRMED
Syllabus. By the Court Dawson. J.
of money only the question whether the
supreme court has jurisdiction to review
the judgment at the instigation of the
party ordered to pay it, depends upon the
amount, exclusive of costs, which the
appellant is required to pay.
2 Under section 566 of the civil code
where the action is for the recovery of
money only, the right of appellant to have
his cause reviewed by the supreme court
which he is required by the Judgment to
pay, and is not affected by the fact that
the judgment is only the total of series
OF Judgments on separate counts no one
which if considered independently would
be for sum large enough to confer juris-
diction for review by the supreme court.
3. Where a plaintiff has acquired title
to number of outstanding claims against
a defendant and his surety, and brings 4
single action thereon, setting up each claim
in separately stated and numbered causes
of sction, each one of which is for sum
of money less than 800, and where the
plaintiff prevails in the action and separate
judgments are given on each count, and an
aggregate Judgment is awarded in his
favor for a sum of money in excess of
$780, section 56tj of the civil code gives the
defendant right of appeal to the supreme
court.
4. Where contractors agree to build a
road and to pay for all labor and ma
terial and all other obligations or liabil-
tiles incurred IN the doing OF the said
work or performance of any of the things
necessary hereunder" and Il surety com
pany, for a valuable consideration, guaran-
tees the performance of the contract, and
where the contractors fail to pay the nee
essary and pertinent bills incurred by
them in such undertaking, the surety COM
pany is liable thereon.
.. In road building contract. which
named the quarry where the materials for
the road were to be obtained, the con-
tractors failed to pay the necessary and
pertinent accounts for dynamite, for coal
consumed in the engine which operated the
rock crusher. for lumber, for the rent of
the quarry and for the rent of tools. Held,
that the surety company was liable for
the payment of these accounts under its
surety obligation.
Johnston. C. J.. Mason, j., and Marshall.
J.. concurring.
Burch, J., Porter. J.. and West. J.. dis
senting from Syllabus No. ) and CORE
spending portion of the opinion
All the Justices concurrfng.
4 true copy.
Attest: D. A VALENTINE.
ISeal.l Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
n. A. VALENTINE,
Clerk Supreme CO urt-
No. 20,1SO.
o. W. Jones, Appellee,

No. 20,1SO.
o. W. Jones, Appellee,
The Atchison, Topeka Santa Fe Rail-
way Company, Appellant.
Appeal from Sedgwick County. division
Reversed and Remanded.
Syllabus. BY the Court. Johnston. C.. J.
1t is within the power of the legislature
to require carriers to carry passengers up
on freight trains and to fix the measure
of their responsibility for injuries suf
fered by passengers choosing that mode of
travel. and under the provisions of Chapter
100 of the Laws of 1900, one who takes
passage on freight train has no right to
expect greater precautions for his safety
than slight care nor to hold the carrier
responsible for any lack of care less than
gross negligence
All the Justices concurring.
true copy.
Attest: D. A VALENTINE.
tSeall Clerk Supreme Court.
No. 2o.1s4
o. NJ Todd and vertie Todd, Appellees.
The Grover Produce Company. Appellant
Appeal from Reno County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus By the Court Burch. j.
The proceedings examined and held a
motion to make the bill of particulars
more definite and certain was properly
overruled, the action was not prematurely
commenced and an instruction relating to
the defendants contention. which was not
sustained, was properly given.
All the Justices concurring.
true copy.
Attest: d. A VALENTINE,
[SealI Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 20,153.
h. E. Hayes. Appellee,

Toe Nutter. Appellant.
Appeal from Washington County,
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. By the Court. Marsnall, j:
In an action for SANDER. the PROOF
Of the words spoken need not correspond
in every particular with the words d AZ
1.harged It is sufficient that the WORDS
CHARGED as substantially proved by the
evidence. e i,s.-uctions
.,-i.tcb orc fnfrIv covered by those gwen
tBaugh " Fist, 81 Kan. 74O' syl. p D. 10
In a Islander case it is not error for
the court to instruct the jury that they
find for the plaintiff If they flnd IRON ON
tbe evidence that the defendant spoke the
sianderous word or words OF substan-
tally the same meaning.
All the Justices concurrlng.
Httest. d. A. VALENTINE,
fSeai1 Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 20,1J9.
L. L. Gilmore, Appellee,

No 2O,159.
L. L. Gilmore, Appellee,
VS..
Annette H. Hoskinson, ct al, Appellants.
Appeal from Reno County.
Reversed and demanded
Syllabus BY the Court. Marshall. J.
L In an action by one who succeeds
to the rights of another under a contract
for the purchase of real property by as
signment of the contract and by quitclaim
deed from the contract purchaser, against
the Administrative and heirs of the per-
son making the contract for the sale of
the real property, the assignor of the con-
tract and grantor in the quitclaim deed
transaction or communication had person
ally by him with the deceased party to the
contract.
2. Where a contrac. purchaser of land.
unable to make payments as stipulated,
executes a warranty deed to third party,
and at the same time takes from that
party contract fer the sale and convey
ance of land, and in that contract prom
Uses to pay for the land an amount sub
stantially equal to the consideration
the land and retains possession thereof,
the deed and contract constitute a mort
gage to secure the payment of the amount
to be paid under the contract.
3. The estate of one who by contract
agreed to convey real property by war
ranty deed is not liable to the contract
purchaser or his assignee or quitclaim
grantee for failure to make a warranty
deed, where that failure is caused by the
failure OF the warranty of the contract
purchaser who conveyed the real property
by warranty deed to the one who con-
tracted to convey the land at the time the
warranty deed was delivered to him.
4. A deed to real property aid another
writing showing that the deed is mort
gage, must be recorded together at the
same time and place, under section 1920
of the Revised Laws of Oklahoma. 1910. in
order to have effect as a recorded mort
gage; and if not so recorded, the effect is
the same as If the mortgage were not re-
corded.
All the Justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: D. A VALENTINE.
ISeal.J Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
LEGAL.

en- action to quiet the title thereto and to
determine adverse claims.
All the Justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE.
: iSeal.l Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13

No. 2O,134.
The First National Bank of Parsons, of
Parsons, Kansas, Appellee,
Matte l.. Kennedy, Claude E. Kennedy and
Lillienne E. kennedy, Appellants.
f. 3. Stevens, Interp1eader.
Appeal from Labette County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. BY the Court. West J.
1. The printers affidavit stating that
sale notice was published in the regular
and entire issue of each number of a daily
newspaper for four weeks, the first publ
cation being January % and the last Feb
urary %, 1915, the sale being on February
a. sufficiently shows publication for thirty
days before the day of sale.
.. A newspaper published each Day of
the week except Sunday is a daily news
paper.
Ali the Justices concurring.
a true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
[Seal.I Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
d. A VALENTINE
Clerk Supreme Court
No. 20,145.
o. H. Johnston, Appellant,


Frank R. Lanter, Appellee
Appeal from Johnston County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. By the Court Johnston, C. J.
1. 1t devolves on one who orders goods
of a particular kind or quality to make
an early inspection of those received to
determine whether they comply with the
terms of the contract and to give notice OF
defects within a reasonable time after the
discovery of the same.
q The mere receipt of goods does not
necessarily amount to waiver OF defects,
but the buyer is bound to exercise rea-
sonable care in the matter of inspection
and is ehargeable with knowledge of such
defects external and visible and
which are observable from an ordinary ex-
animation, and whether he has acted with
reasonable diligence in that respect and
given notice of discovered defects to the
seller within a reasonable time, are ordt-
narily questions for the determination OF
the jury.
g. The finding that there was no waiver
of defects in the goods purchased by the
defendant is sustained
4. One who claims damages on account
of breach of contract must not only
prove the injury sustained, but must also
show with reasonable certainty the amount
of damages suffered a result OF the
injury.
All the justices concurriDg-
A true copy.
Attest: D. A VA ENTINE.
(Seal.] Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
d. A. VALENTINE.
Clerk Supreme Court

No. 20.144
Friedericka Geffert and Henry Geffert
Appellants
Adolph Geffert ct al Appellees.
Appeal from Washing ton County,
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. By the Court. Dawson. ]
l. Rule followed that n court of equity
will not enforce a forfeiture where circuin-
stances permit II to decline to do so and
where the substantial rights of the parties
demanding the forfeiture can otherwise be
adequately protected and compensated
2. The plaintiffs owned a section of
land. As they grew old and feeble and
the management of their lands became n
to their four sons, quarter section TO
each. Each deed contained the following
provision:
..The party of the second part shall pay
to the parties of the first part the of
Two Hundred Dollars tS2O000) per an
mum as follows: Two Hundred Dollars
(S2O0.00) TO be paid on the first day of
May 1905 and like sum to be paid on the
first day of May in each succeeding year
during the life time of the said parties of
the first part or either of them
should the said party of the
second part fail TO make payments as
above set forth or fail to pay all taxes. or
taxes that may be levied against the said
land for a period of one year after the said
payments shall become due, the premises
herein granted shall revert to and become
the property Of the said parties of first
part
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 20, 146.
W. d. Wilson, Appellant,

W. d. Wilson, Appellant
J. 7. johnson, Appellee.
Appeal from Lyon County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus By the Court Burch. J.
The evidence examined and held to sus-
tain findings that the defendants name
was written on the back of the notes sued
on without his authority and without con-
sidera ton.
All the Justices concurring.
true copy.
Attest: D. A VALENTINE.
ISeaI.j Clerk Supreme Court
First published in The Topeka State
Journal, May II, 1861
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 20.531
The State Bank of Eudora, Appellee,

No. 20.Io1
The State Bank of Eudora, Appellee,
John Brecheisen and Ursula Brecheisen.
Appellants
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. BY the Court. Porter, J.
In a trial before the court of a suit
in the nature of a creditors bill. the plead
ings and admissions of defendants. who
were husband and wife. showed that an
easftion on rsh ,ne % nag been returned
unsatisficd, that shortly before the com
menceinent of the action In which which the
delivered to his wife bill of sale for his
personal property valued at 81. 500 and
warranty deed for 40 acres of valuable
farm lands retaining another farm which
was the homestead, and that the consider
alton stated In each conveyance was one
dollar and love and affection Held. In the
absence of any showing that defendants
were prejudiced by the ruling or that
thew had real defense TO the action, it
was not material error to rule that the
burden rested upon them to explain the
transaction.
there was abuse of discretion In the re-
fusal to permit the filing of an amended
answer.
All the Justices Concurring.
Attest: n. A. VALENTINE.
ISeaLl Clerk Supreme Court
No eo.472
George W. Dashieil. as Trustee, etc, APP
pellee,
w.
w. L. Mcclure, Appellant
Appeal from Shawnee County division
No. 81
AFFIRMED
Syllabus. BY the Court Mason. j.
Where an amended petition is filed
which recites that all the allegations of
the original petition are made part there
of. no error is committed in overruling a
demurrer to the amended pleading II the
facts stated In either both of them
sufficient to constitute cause of action
All the Justices Soncurring-
A true copy.
Attest: D. A VALENTINE,
ISeaIl Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13

No. 1905
ARENAS Ward, doing business under the
firm name of Ward & Cow, Appellee,
The Abilena Sales Company, Appellant.
Appeal from Dickinson County.
DISMISSED.
Syllabus. By the Court. Marshall. j.
l. Under section 565 of the code of civil
procedure, an appeal can not be taken
from an order granting a continuance
2. Where a demurrer TO evidence has
been filed, it is not error from which an
appeal can be taken to grant continuance.
on verbal request therefor. to procure
additional evidence, although the demurrer
is not disposed of and is good as against
the evidence introduced.
All the Justices concurring.
A true copy
Attest: D. A VALENTINE
lSeal.1 Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 2O.176.
Mrs. VIM. B. Orr. Appellee.

No. 2O,116
Mrs. VIM. B. Orr. Appellee.
Us.
The Missouri Pacific Railway Company,
Appellant.
Appeal from Wyandotte County.
Third Division.
AFFIRMED
Syllabus. By the Court. West J.
1. The evidence examined and found to
support the general verdict. The special
findings examined and held not essentially
inconsistent with one another or with the
general verdict
2. The rule that the general findings
must, If possible, be harmonized with the
general verdict. followed.
3. The practice of procuring or attempt
ing to procure for nominal sum a release
from one still suffering from the excite
mept and pain of n recent injury is not
to be encouraged or judieially approved.
All the Justices eoncurring.
A true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE
tSeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 2O.133

No. 20.133.
Rev William Shellberg, ct ,.al as Pastor
and Board of Consultors of st. Johns
Parish of the Roman Catholic Church,
Appelles,
Margaret Mcmahon, Appellant
Appeal from Washington County.
AFFIRMED.
The pastor of a Catholic church and
parish school made written contract with
the defendant by which the defendant
agreed to pay the church and school GER
tain sum of money when they furnished
her Il clear title releasing her from all
by virtue of the last will and testament
of her deceased husband Held.
1. Under section 81 of the Civil Code
an action may be maintained on the con-
tract for the benefit of the church and
school by the person in whose name the
contract was made.
bona fide dispute between the parties as to
whether the school and church had ac-
quired an interest in certain property by
virtue of the Will, compromise or set
Element having been entered into in good
faith. there sufficient consideration
for the agreement to pay.
8. The written contract being ambig-
nous and uncertain with respect to what
the church and school were to do or leave
undone in order to release the defendant of
all claims under the will, it was proper
to receive oral testimony in order to show
reduced to writing TO the effect that the
defendant was to commence some kind of
an notion to have the will declared null
and void. to which the church and school
were to interpose no defense.
4. Upon evidence showing that the de
PENDANT brought an action against the
church and school and procured a decree
uuieting her title to the property described
in the will, and that defendants in that
suit interposcd to defense, the plaintiffs
in the present action are entitled to re-
cover upon the agreement.
All the Jusuces concurrfng.
true copy
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE.
ISeai.l Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
No. 20,136.
S. o. Galley, Appellee,

Peet Brothers Manufacturing Company,
Appellant.
Appeal from Wyandotte County.
Third division.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. BY the. Court. Marshall. j.
1. Under the workmens compensation act
claws 1911, CHI. 21S; Laws 1913, ch. 216) an
employee who as Il result of an injury to
his fingers, can not tightly close them in
to perform his work is partially incapac;-
tated from performing labor.
by an injury from performing his labor
does not lose his right to compensation
remaining in the employment Of his master
at his former wages
5. Under the workmen's compensation
act. any statement, oral or written. made
within the proper time. by which the in
jured employee makes it known to his en-
ployer that he is claiming compensation, is
4. Under the workmen's compensation
act. claim of error in rendering Judgment
without allowing the defendant for pay
ments which the workman may have re-
ceived from the employer during his period
of ineapacity is unavaillng, where the en-
the jury covering that question. and it does
not appear that the allowance was not
made.
All the Justices concurring
true copy. ...-
Attest: D. A VALENTINE,
lSeal Clerk Supreme Court
No. 2o171.
Rebecea NJ. Eisenbise Cal Keiser as Assig-
nee etc. Appellant),
J. NJ Eisenbise Appellee
Appeal from Cove County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus By the Court Mason. j.
Where the parties to a divorce suit file
a stipulation that the defendant shall pay
a stated amount as the fee of the plain
tiff's attorney. and the cause is dismissed
without any order having been made in
reference thereto, the court has no jurisdic-
ton at a subsequent term to render iudg
ment for such payment
All the Justices concurring.
A true copy
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
ISeal.1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-05-13
d. A. VALENTINE.
Clerk Supreme Court.
No. 2O172
The Citizens State Bank of Chautauuua.
Kansas, Appellee,

No. 2O,172
The Citizens State Bank of Chautauoua
kansas. Appellee.
The First National Bank of Sedan, Kansas.
Appellant.
Appeal from Chautauqua County.
AFFIRMED.
syllabus. by the Court. Porter ]
l. Section 400 of the General Statutes of
a9o9 as amended by section of chapter
65. Laws of 1911. which prohibits a bank
from giving preference to any depOsitor
or creditor by pledging the assets of the
bank, applies only to a bank which is in
2. An agreement in pronissory note
executed by "A solvent bank by which it
agrees TO give additional securities in the
valid agreement only long as the borrow
Ing bank remains in a solvent condition
statute lGen. Stat. 1908, sec. 400, amended
Laws 1911. oh. Go. sec. u which forbids a
bank TO give preference to any depositor
3. A solvent bank borrowed $4,000 from
another bank and gave its promissory note.
pledging at the same time certain of its
assets collateral security. The
note contained an agreement to
Eiye b addi 5s as security upon notifea
the borrowing bank WIS insolvent. its off
GERS at the demand of the holder turned
the Indebtedness. Upon these facts 1t is
held that the previous agreement did not
create t an equitable lien on the assets sub
will lie at the suit of the borrower to re-
cover the assets turned over in violation
of the statute
Notwithstanding the statute which
prohibits banks from preferring creditors,
contains no declaration that any act In vio-
lation thereof shall be void, it is held
that creditor who accepts a preference
from an ilsolvent bank will not be per-
mitted to retain the benefits of the trans
action.
5. On the facts stated in the opinion it
is held that it was not condition preced-
ent to the plaintiffs right to maintain the
action of replevin that it tender back GER
tain securities surrendered by the defend
ant at the time the additional securities
were turned over.
All the Justices concurrtng.
A true copy
Attest: u. A. VALENTINE,
ISeal.1 Clerk of Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-02-26
FARM LOANS

FARM LANDS, 8 and per cent See
Nichols Realty Co., 529 Kansas ave. Tel
40.