O'Neill v. Douthitt
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Elk District Court. Action brought by Douthitt and another against O’Neill, to recover $1,000 by them paid to him as a part of the purchase-price of certain lands to be conveyed by defendant to plaintiffs by a good and sufficient warranty deed; and also to recover interest on $350 thereof from December 22,1883, at the rate of 7 per cent, per annum, and interest at the same rate on $650 thereof from January 20, 1884. Trial at the October term, 1886. The jury found…
Read the full summary
Error from Elk District Court. Action brought by Douthitt and another against O’Neill, to recover $1,000 by them paid to him as a part of the purchase-price of certain lands to be conveyed by defendant to plaintiffs by a good and sufficient warranty deed; and also to recover interest on $350 thereof from December 22,1883, at the rate of 7 per cent, per annum, and interest at the same rate on $650 thereof from January 20, 1884. Trial at the October term, 1886. The jury found for the plaintiffs, and assessed the amount of their recovery at $1,175. The defendant filed a motion for a new trial,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Clogston, C.:
In December, 1883, O’Neill sold to Douthitt & Wyatt a certain tract of land in Elk county, Kansas, for the sum of $7,000, by a written contract, the terms of which were that they were to pay O’Neill $350 cash down; $650 on January 20, 1884; and $6,000 on March 1, 1884, *317at which time he was to convey the land to them by a good and sufficient warranty deed, with the usual covenants, free and clear of incumbrances, and in default of any payment, all payments made to be forfeited. O’Neill represented that he was the owner in fee simple of the property, and had the right to…
2Cited by4 opinions
- In Re OlanderSupreme Court of Kansas · 1973
- O'Neill v. DouthittSupreme Court of Kansas · 1889
- State v. SteinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1973
- Smith v. ChenowethCity of New York Municipal Court · 1886