Kellogg v. Douglas County Bank
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Neosho District Court. . Hon, L. Still-well, Judge. Three petitions in error, by Q,. A. Kellogg, as plaintiff in error, are attached to one record. Each of these has been given a separate number by the clerk.
Read the full summary
Error from Neosho District Court. . Hon, L. Still-well, Judge. Three petitions in error, by Q,. A. Kellogg, as plaintiff in error, are attached to one record. Each of these has been given a separate number by the clerk. The defendants in error first named in the petitions, and Who are the only parties appearing in this court, are the Douglas County Bank, in number 9494; Latham, Alexander & Co., in number 9495, and the Chemical National Bank, of St. Louis, in number 9496. The Douglas County Bank brought suit on a promissory • note, executed by Kellogg on the twentieth of November, 1891, for…
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
The sufficiency of the record to present the errors complained of is challenged. If there are really three separate cases, it is difficult to see how all may be prosecuted on one record. Parkhurst v. National Bank, 55 Kan. 100. As all of the cases were tried together in the District Court, and all the parties laid claim to the attached property, and as all of the parties necessary to a consideration of the questions involved are made defendants in error in one or another of the petitions in error which are attached to the single case-made, we are inclined to treat the case here as a single…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Heard v. Dubuque County BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1878
- Robinson v. LairSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
- Briggs v. LathamSupreme Court of Kansas · 1887
- State Savings Ass'n v. A. J. Hunt & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1877
- Parkhurst v. First National Bank of ClydeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1895
3Cited by35 opinions
- Home Fire Insurance v. BarberNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
- Brown v. Wichita State UniversitySupreme Court of Kansas · 1975
- Roberts v. W. H. Hughes Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1912
- In re BrausCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1917
- Hamilton Ridge Lumber Sales Corporation v. WilsonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1928
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.