Repealed

57-103. History: L. 1889, ch. 182, § 3; R.S. 1923, 57-103; Repealed, L. 1951, ch. 333, § 1; March 29. CASE ANNOTATIONS 1. Vendee may recover although his contract prohibited by statute. Mason v. McLeod, 57 Kan. 105, 108, 45 P. 76. 2. If statute not complied with rescission may be had. Allen v. Riley, 71 Kan. 378, 80 P. 952. Affirmed: Allen v. Riley, 203 U.S. 347, 27 S. Ct. 95, 51 L. Ed. 216. 3. Rights of parties where note given; statute not complied with. Nyhart v. Kubach, 76 Kan. 154, 90 P. 796. 4. Information sufficient which alleges that agent sold patent for corporation. The State v. Morey, 81 Kan. 149, 105 P. 501. 5. Notes substituted for original notes held within statute and void. Bolte v. Sparks, 85 Kan. 13, 15, 116 P. 224. 6. Judgment of Illinois court on patent-right note held conclusive. Trust Co. v. McCoy, 86 Kan. 588, 594, 121 P. 1090. 7. Contract in violation of statute; no recovery on quantum meruit. Ridgway v. Wetterhold, 96 Kan. 736, 153 P. 490. 8. Provisions of statute not complied with; contract void. Hager v. Hale, 110 Kan. 507, 508, 204 P. 529. 9. Statute not followed; sale contract illegal, void; action not maintainable. Sage v. Oil Country Specialties Mfg. Co., 138 Kan. 501, 511, 27 P.2d 542. 10. Contract for sale of patent unenforceable if statute not followed. Kreimer v. Midland Industries, Inc., 164 Kan. 325, 326, 188 P.2d 660. Previous | Next LEGISLATIVE COORDINATING COUNCIL General Policies 2026 Archived LCC Documents Archived LCC Meetings REVISOR OF STATUTES Archived Session Documents Archived School Finance Documents USEFUL LINKS Session Laws Kansas Administrative Regulations OTHER LEGISLATIVE SITES Kansas Legislature Administrative Services Division of Post Audit Research Department Contact Us PDF Help www.ksrevisor.gov 2026