Legal Opinion

Tull v. Royston

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided July 15, 1883PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Error from Harper District Court. At the March Term, 1883, defendant Royston had judgment against plaintiff Tull, who brings it here for review. The nature of the action, and the facts, appear in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Horton, C. J.:

The facts in this, case are as follows: The plaintiff purchased of the defendant lot 6 and the west half of lot 5, in block 37, in the city of Harper, in this state, and on the 17th day of September, 1881,'the defendant and his wife executed to the plaintiff a deed therefor, “warranting the property to be free, clear, discharged and unincumbered of and from all former and other grants, titles, charges, estates, judgments, assessments, taxes, liens and incumbrances of what nature or kind soever.” Some time prior thereto, the city of Harper…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé Railroad v. JaquesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1878

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Board of County Commissioners v. RobbSupreme Court of Kansas · 1946
  2. Cemansky v. FitchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
  3. State Highway Commission v. City of TopekaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1964
  4. Everett v. MarstonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
  5. Armstrong v. Banking Trust Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1915

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API