Legal Opinion

Guy v. Doak

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided June 6, 1891PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error from Kearny District Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Simpson, G.:

A. E. Guy, as receiver of J. H. Allen and A. P. Allen, filed his petition in the district court *237of Kearny county on the 14th day of May, 1888, against D. P. Doak and A. T. Irvin, to recover the possession of 37 head of horses, 2 mules, 3 wagons, 400 tons of hay, and 218 head of cattle, alleged to be the property of the Allens. Guy claimed to have been appointed receiver in the action of Ott & Tewksbury, the Hamilton Land Company and M. F. Cooley v. D. P. Doak, A. T. Irvin, the Kendall Exchange Bank, and Thomas Doak, then pending in the district court of Kearny county, in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Baker v. Administrator of BackusIllinois Supreme Court · 1863
  2. Jones v. SchallMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  3. Hardy v. McClellanMississippi Supreme Court · 1876

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. District No. 21 United Mine Workers of America v. BourlandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
  2. Baltimore Bargain House v. St. ClairWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1906
  3. In re BrantU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1899
  4. Martin v. HarnageSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
  5. Childress v. Fox Mining Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1930

1 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