Case Name: A. R. Lasley, Appellant, v. G. W. Bartlett et al., Appellees
Court: Kansas Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Kansas
Decision Date: 1912-06-08
Citations: 87 Kan. 390
Docket Number: No. 17,674
Parties: A. R. Lasley, Appellant, v. G. W. Bartlett et al., Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: Kansas Reports
Volume: 87
Pages: 390–391

Head Matter:
A. R. Lasley, Appellant, v. G. W. Bartlett et al., Appellees.
No. 17,674.
HEADNOTE BY THE REPORTER.
Tax Deed — Contiguous Lots — Presumptions. Where a number of city lots are included in a tax deed on record more than five years and there is nothing on the face of the deed to show that the lots are not contiguous, the presumption is in favor of the validity of the tax deed.
Appeal from Scott district court.
Opinion filed June 8, 1912.
Affirmed.
J. S. Simmons, and W.H. Russell, for the .appellant.
R. D. Armstrong, for the appellees.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
Several conceivable plans involving consecutive and orderly numbering would make the lots contiguous. There is nothing on the face of the deed to show that they are not contiguous. Presumptions .are to be indulged in favor of the deed and not against it. The deed being good, on its face was not vulnerable to evidence showing the lots were not in fact contiguous. In Worden v. Cole, 74 Kan. 226, 86 Pac. 464, the lots lay in different blocks, which implied separating streets.
The judgment is affirmed