Legal Opinion

Diehl v. Davis

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 5, 1907No. 14,809PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error from Johnson district court; Winfield H. Sheldon, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Burch, J.:

The suit in the distriejwcourt was brought to obtain a personal judgment on promissory note to the plaintiff signed by E. P. Diehl and Emma Diehl, and to foreclose a real-estate mortgage given by the makers of the note to secure its payment. The Diehls are husband and wife, and the mortgaged land belongs to Mrs. Diehl. Mrs. Diehl answered that she was only a surety for her husband; that the time for the payment of her husband’s obligation had been extended by a contract in writing concluded and indorsed on the note without her knowledge or…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Jenness v. CutlerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1874
  2. Jackson v. LongwellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
  3. Perry v. HorackSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
  4. Hubbard v. OgdenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1879
  5. Lorimer v. FairchildSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Fourth National Bank v. HillSupreme Court of Kansas · 1957
  2. State Bank v. CriswellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1942
  3. Cole v. Exchange National Bank of ChicagoSupreme Court of Florida · 1966
  4. Thompson v. Metropolitan Building Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1917
  5. Vinick v. Fourth National Bank of TulsaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API