TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Havens v. Pope

Carrie E. Havens v. John Pope and John Hayes

Havens v. Pope, 62 P. 540 (Kan. Ct. App. 1900)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals of Kansas · State Appellate Courts
Decided
October 10, 1900
Docket
No. 192
Judges
Wells
Citations
62 P. 54010 Kan. App. 3051900 Kan. App. LEXIS 138
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Practice, District Court—Dormant Judgment—Revivor. An order of sale issued after the death of the plaintiff in a foreclosure proceeding where no revivor is had is void, and a purchaser thereunder takes no title to the land sold.
Summary
Error from Rawlins district court; A. C. T. Geiger, judge.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Wells

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

The opinion of the court was delivered by Wells, J.:

The only question we deem it necessary to decide in this case is: In an action for the foreclosure of a mortgage on real estate, where the plaintiff dies after the decree of foreclosure and before the issuance of an 'order of sale, and no revivor is had, but afterward an order of sale is issued, the property sold, sale confirmed, and deed made to the purchaser, does said deed convey the title of the property so sold? This question must be answered in the negative. Upon the death of the plaintiff the judgment became dormant, and the court had no authority to issue order of sale thereon without a revivor.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1921: 11937: 11971: 119212026peak 1921 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Bingham v. National Bank72 P.2d 90 (Mont. 1937)
  2. Sealey v. Smith1921 OK 115, 197 P. 490
  3. Joseph Ansay v. Boecking-Berry Equipment Co., a Corporation450 F.2d 433 (10th Cir. 1971)

Most recent

  1. Joseph Ansay v. Boecking-Berry Equipment Co., a Corporation450 F.2d 433 (10th Cir. 1971)
  2. Bingham v. National Bank72 P.2d 90 (Mont. 1937)
  3. Sealey v. Smith1921 OK 115, 197 P. 490

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list