Legal Opinion

Wheeler v. Beem

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided July 8, 1922No. 23,839PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from Franklin district court; Hugh Means, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Burch, J.:

The action was one by the vendor of real estate to compel the vendee to perform. Judgment -was rendered for the plaintiff, and the defendant appeals.

The contract provided the land should be free from encumbrance, and the vendee based refusal to perform on existence of an encumbrance. The claimed encumbrance originated in a contract between property owners and the city in which the real estate is situated, relating to construction and maintenance of a sewer. The property owners, in consideration of benefits to be derived, granted to the city a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Clark v. FisherSupreme Court of Kansas · 1894
  2. Ireton v. ThomasSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911
  3. First Unitarian Society v. Citizens Savings & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1913
  4. Spaeth v. KounsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1915
  5. Armstrong v. Banking Trust Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1915

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Crum v. Guffey-Gillespie Oil Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1924
  2. Law Co., Inc. v. Mohawk Const. & Supply Co.District Court, D. Kansas · 2010
  3. Miller-Carey Drilling Co. v. ShafferSupreme Court of Kansas · 1936
  4. Shunk v. FullerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1925
  5. Robbins v. HannenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1963

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