Legal Opinion

Gibson v. Hammerburg

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided December 9, 1905No. 14,316PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error from Montgomery district court; Thomas J. Flannelly, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Johnston, C. J.:

In an action to recover a lot in the city of Cherryvale the result turned on whether a tax deed purporting to convey the lot, and under which Godfrey Hammerburg held, was valid on its face. The defect relied on by Charles E. Gibson, who held under a conveyance from the original owner, was that a full description of the land was not given in the granting clause of the tax deed. In the first part of the tax deed, and as a part of the recital that the lot was subject to taxation, it'is fully and accurately described. In the succeeding…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Dodge v. EmmonsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1886
  2. Haynes v. HellerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1874
  3. Hobson v. DuttonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1872
  4. McDonough v. MertenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1894
  5. Duncan v. GilletteSupreme Court of Kansas · 1887

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Treese v. FergusonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
  2. Hatchett v. GoingSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
  3. Cheney v. CoxSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
  4. Gibson v. ShinerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1906

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API