Case Name: The Citizens State Bank of Cheney, Appellant, v. George R. Clark, Marshal, H. H. Bond, Deputy Marshal of the City Court of Wichita, in Wichita City Township, Sedgwick County, and Hettie Metz, Intervener, Appellees
Court: Kansas Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Kansas
Decision Date: 1928-05-05
Citations: 126 Kan. 162
Docket Number: No. 28,098
Parties: The Citizens State Bank of Cheney, Appellant, v. George R. Clark, Marshal, H. H. Bond, Deputy Marshal of the City Court of Wichita, in Wichita City Township, Sedgwick County, and Hettie Metz, Intervener, Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: Kansas Reports
Volume: 126
Pages: 162–162

Head Matter:
No. 28,098.
The Citizens State Bank of Cheney, Appellant, v. George R. Clark, Marshal, H. H. Bond, Deputy Marshal of the City Court of Wichita, in Wichita City Township, Sedgwick County, and Hettie Metz, Intervener, Appellees.
(266 Pac. 932.)
Opinion filed May 5, 1928.
Jesse D. Wall, of Wichita, for the appellant.
S. S. Alexander, of Kingman, for Hettie Metz, intervener, and Tom Harley, of Wichita, for defendant marshal and deputy marshal, appellees.

Opinion:
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Harvey, J.:
This is an action by the holder of a chattel mortgage on growing wheat to enjoin the sale of the crop under an execution in another action against the mortgagor. A temporary injunction was issued. On the trial in April, 1927, there was judgment for defendant, which dissolved the injunction. This judgment was erroneous. (Isely Lumber Co. v. Kitch, 123 Kan. 441, 256 Pac. 133.) No appeal was taken in time to keep the injunction in force. (R. S. 60-3331.) Thereafter, and within the time provided by statute (R. S. 60-3309) for appeals generally in civil cases, plaintiff perfected an appeal to this court. This appeal did not keep the temporary injunction in force. (Brown v. Wilkerson, 82 Kan. 553, 108 Pac. 816.) In the meantime, there being nothing to stay the execution sale, we are advised that the wheat crop has been sold and the proceeds disbursed. The action to enjoin the sale under the execution is therefore moot, and no ruling which this court might make on the question at this time could affect it in any way.
The appeal is therefore dismissed.