Steele v. Baum
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Thomas Distriet Court. Proceedings in attachment by Steele & Walker against J. E. Baum. A motion by Enoch Baum to discharge the attachment was sustained, and the plaintiffs come to this court. The opinion states the facts. The motion of defendant in error should be sustained.
Read the full summary
Error from Thomas Distriet Court. Proceedings in attachment by Steele & Walker against J. E. Baum. A motion by Enoch Baum to discharge the attachment was sustained, and the plaintiffs come to this court. The opinion states the facts. The motion of defendant in error should be sustained. The absence of a party to the order or judgment appealed from, who will necessarily be affected by a modification or reversal of the said judgment or order, defeats the jurisdiction of the court, and there can be no review of any part of such order or judgment. Paving Co. v. Botsford, 50 Kas. 331; Ferguson v.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Horton, C. J.:
On the 17th day of August, 1889, Steele & Walker brought their action against J. D. Baum to recover $235.60. At the time of commencing the action, they procured an order of attachment against the property of the defendant. This order of attachment was levied upon certain real estate at Rexford, in Thomas county, as the property of J. D. Baum. On the 9th of November, 1889, J. D. Baum filed a motion to set aside the attachment. On November 14, 1889, one Enoch Baum also filed a motion to discharge the attachment as to the real estate levied…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ferguson v. SmithSupreme Court of Kansas · 1872
3Cited by2 opinions
- Strange v. CrismonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Perkins v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1898