Swenson v. Aultman, Miller & Co.
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Davis District Cowrt. Action, by Aultman, Miller & Co., to foreclose a mortgage executed by Swenson and wife. The questions here were as to the correctness of the ruling of the district court, in refusing a continuance asked by defendants at the November Term 1873. The plaintiffs had judgment, and the defendants' appeal.
1Opinion of the Court
*274The opinion of the court was delivered by
Valentine, J.:
1. Diligence; procuring testimony. This was an action brought by Aultman, Miller & Co. against Samuli O. Swenson and John P. Swenson on a promissory note and a mortgage. John P. Swenson originally owed the debt to Aultman, Miller & Co., and his wife Samuli O. Swenson executed said note for the debt, and they both executed the mortgage to secure the payment of the note. Mrs. Swenson, set forth in her answer that her signature to the note and mortgage was obtained fraudulently. When the case was called for trial she asked for a continuance…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Luby v. . the Hudson River Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Sweatland v. Ill. & Miss. Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1869
- State v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- Davis v. WilsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1873
- Educational Ass'n of Christian Churches v. HitchcockSupreme Court of Kansas · 1866
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Chickasha Cotton Oil Co. v. Lamb & TynerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Chickasha Cotton Oil Co. v. LambSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Maston v. Glen Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- Wilkins v. MooreSupreme Court of Kansas · 1878
- Payne v. First National BankSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.