Legal Opinion

Park v. Busenbark

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 8, 1898No. 10919PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error from the Court of Appeals, Northern Department.

1Opinion of the CourtDoster, C. J.

This was an action to recover the amount of a promissory note and to foreclose a mortgage given to secure it, brought by plaintiff in error against Peter Busenbark, the maker of the two instruments.

To the action, Newell P. Busenbark and Alice, his wife, and A. J. Eggleston and Sarah, his wife, were made defendants, under an allegation that they “ have or claim some interest in, or title to the said real property, but the same if existing, whatever it may be, is subject and inferior to the lien of plaintiff’s said mortgage. ” The prayer for j udgment against the four last named defendants was :

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Busenbark v. ParkCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1897

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Provident Loan Trust Co. v. MarksSupreme Court of Kansas · 1898
  2. McClain v. JonesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1899
  3. Warren Mortgage Co. v. WintersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1915
  4. Gallon v. HaasSupreme Court of Kansas · 1903
  5. Tipton v. McCallaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1898

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