TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Tibbetts v. Deck

H. M. Tibbetts v. Thomas Deck

Tibbetts v. Deck, 41 Kan. 492 (1889)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 15, 1889
Citations
41 Kan. 492
Headnotes
Abatement and Revival —IAmitation. Under the civil code, § 433, providing that an order to revive an action against the representatives or successors of a defendant, against their consent, cannot be made, except within one year from the time it could have been first made, a proceeding in error will be dismissed on motion, where defendant in error died pending the proceeding, and the action has not been revived within a year, and the successors of deceased refuse to consent to a revivor.
Summary
Error from Miami District Court.- The opinion states the case.

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

Opinion of the Court

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

Per Curiam:

The district court of Miami county rendered judgment in this action, decreeing that Thomas Deck was the absolute owner of certain real estate, and quieting his title thereto as against H. M. Tibbetts. The judgment was given April 9, 1887, and brought to this court for review on June 6, 1887. While this proceeding in error was pending, and on March 12, 1888, Thomas Deck, who was defendant in error, died. The action or proceeding has not been revived against the heirs of Thomas Deck, and they refuse to consent to a revivor, and now move to dismiss this proceeding. An order to revive an action against their consent cannot be made except in one year from the time it could have been first made. (Civil Code, § 433.) As there can be no revivor, the proceeding in error must be dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1912: 119122026peak 1912 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Fenton1912 OK 286, 123 P. 169

Most recent

  1. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Fenton1912 OK 286, 123 P. 169

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