Legal Opinion

Banister v. Fallis

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided July 7, 1911No. 17,010PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from Cheyenne district court.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

BURCH, J.:

The plaintiff, Banister, and the defendant, Fallís, agreed in writing to exchange land,- each party to furnish an abstract showing perfect title to his land. The parties met at a bank to close the trade, when a supposed defect in the title to the Fallís land *321was discovered. James L. Peacock had once owned the tract. In February, 1898, he deeded it to The McKinley-Lanning Loan & Trust Co. The records disclosed an unacknowledged instrument dated March 2, 1898, purporting to be an agreement on the part of “McKinley & Lanning” that if Peacock…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Wickersham v. Chicago Zinc Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1877
  2. McBride v. SteinwedenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1906
  3. Smith v. WorsterSupreme Court of Kansas · 1898
  4. Lee v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1903
  5. Fisher v. CowlesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1889

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hoard v. JonesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1925
  2. Riffel v. DieterSupreme Court of Kansas · 1945
  3. Tawney v. BlankenshipSupreme Court of Kansas · 1939
  4. Empire Gas & Fuel Co. v. SternCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1926
  5. Nordman v. RauSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911

5 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