By the Court,
For the reasons given in the preceding case of Higginbotham v. Thomas, the judgment in this case is affirmed.
Valentine, J.,'concurring.
Brewer, J., not sitting in the case.
9 Kan. 342
Alex. A. Higginbotham, et al., v. Alice A. Thomas.
The facts in this case are precisely like those in preceding case, except that this action was brought by Thomas to recover possession of Lot 16, Block 48; and that Higginbotham’s co-defendants were different parties. The judgment below was in favor of Thomas, and the defendants bring the case here.
Stillings & Fenlon, and Ch'een & Foster, for plaintiffs in error.
Clough <fe Wheat, for defendant in error.
Higginbotham v. Thomas
9 Kan. 342
Case Details
9 Kan. 342
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!