Zeininger v. Schnitzler
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Sedgwick Court of Common Pleas. This action was brought by Fritz Schnitzler against CharlesZeininger, to recover $517.45 and interest, upon a petition alleging that the plaintiff “was the owner of a certain stone foundation and brick wall on the division line between lots-Nos. 16 and 18, on Market street, in the city of Wichita, being the south wall of the brick building located on lot No. 18;” and that “the defendant erected a certain brick building on lot No.…
Read the full summary
Error from Sedgwick Court of Common Pleas. This action was brought by Fritz Schnitzler against CharlesZeininger, to recover $517.45 and interest, upon a petition alleging that the plaintiff “was the owner of a certain stone foundation and brick wall on the division line between lots-Nos. 16 and 18, on Market street, in the city of Wichita, being the south wall of the brick building located on lot No. 18;” and that “the defendant erected a certain brick building on lot No. 16, and in the construction of the building used the south half of the stone foundation and brick wall built by plaintiff…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Horton, C. J.:
It is contended that the trial court committed error in admitting evidence for the purpose of proving an estoppel. The petition alleged that the foundation and brick wall were on the division line between lots 16 and 18, on Market street, in Wichita. The evidence offered tended to show that the plaintiff below employed the city engineer to designate and mark out the correct division line between lots 16 and 18. It seems to have been established that the foundation and wall were constructed upon the line so designated, and that the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Coumas v. Transcontinental Garage, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1951
- Bank of Escondido v. ThomasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Puls v. GiwoskySupreme Court of Kansas · 1924
- Long v. SmyreSupreme Court of Kansas · 1912