Butler v. Butler

Supreme Court of Kansas
Butler v. Butler, 82 Kan. 130 (Kan. 1910)
107 P. 540; 1910 Kan. LEXIS 206
Benson

Butler v. Butler

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Benson, J.:

A motion is made to dismiss this appeal for want of an abstract. We agree with counsel that the abstract of the appellant is quite insufficient. The petition and affidavit upon which the contempt proceedings were founded, and the answer thereto, are not abstracted. Some of the evidence is set out in the abstract, but more is contained in the brief. The abstract and brief are so intermingled that it is difficult to distinguish between them; but the appellee has properly supplied these omissions by furnishing a counter abstract, and, the case being thus presented, the motion will be denied. The costs of the counter abstract will be taxed against the appellant.

*133The judgment for contempt can not be sustained. It was shown that Mrs. Butler did not herself request the execution of the instruments, and no one claiming to act by her authority made such request for her. The party who sent the papers by mail did not intimate that he had such authority, and the others who presented the deed in person, when asked by whose authority they were acting, or who requested them to act, did not claim to represent Mrs. Butler. The appellant was entitled to this information before signing the papers.

Another a,nd more serious objection is urged in behalf of the appellant. The instruments presented for his signature contained covenants of warranty. It can not be claimed that the judgment required him to enter into such covenants. He was only required to join in conveyances to devest his wife of whatever title she had received should she so desire, and was not required to make a better title or to become personally liable for any defect or encumbrance. What interest is conveyed, or might be conveyed, by the peculiar instruments signed by the wife need not be considered.

The appellant contends that the court had no jurisdiction of the proceedings because no accusation as provided by the statute was filed. (Laws 1901, ch. 132, §2; Gen. Stat. 1901, § 1983.) He can not, however,' complain of this, since he filed his answer to the petition without objection, treating that as a sufficient charge, thereby waiving a formal accusation.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Reference

Full Case Name
Barbara E. Butler v. James T. Butler
Cited By
5 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT. 1. Contempt — Conveyances Decreed in Divorce Proceeding — Refusal to Execute Warranty Deeds. Where, in a judgment in a suit for divorce, the husband is ordered to join with the wife, upon her request, in a conveyance of land adjudged to her in a division of the property, he is not obliged to execute a deed containing covenants of warranty on his part, and is not in contempt of court for refusing to do so. 2. -;— Execution of Conveyances Decreed upon Request — Authority of Person Making Request. The husband who was so adjudged to execute a conveyance upon the request of the wife is not compelled to execute such instrument until so requested by her, or by some person authorized by her to make such request; and the person who makes the request should state by whose authority he acts, if the husband asks for such information.