aside or modified without a second reference of the case or report to the referee.67 On consideration of a motion by a party to confirm the report of a referee, if the conclusions of law of the referee are erroneous or made in favor of the wrong party, the court may overrule the motion to confirm.68 Findings of fact by a referee may be amended by the court in any case where the changes merely reflect the different views of the court as to the effect of the testimony.9 It is within the discretion of the trial court on sustaining a motion for new trial to deny a request to send the case back to the referee with directions to make additional findings.70 Exceptions to a report of the referee may by order of court be referred back to the referee, to be made by the party making them more clear and intelligible as to the ground of exception already contained therein.71 On a motion to confirm a referee's report, if no exceptions are made to the facts found, they must be taken, as to the party making the motion, as they were found by the referee." 72 A referee's report on the facts when approved by the court cannot be challenged by a motion to modify and amend the judgment.78 67 Tribal Development Co. v. White Bros., 114 P. 736, 28 Okl. 525, reversing judgment on rehearing 111 P. 195. The court, after confirming a referee's findings of fact and conclusions of law, is not bound by his suggestions in a written opinion filed with his report. Holmes v. Holt, 142 P. 369, 93 Kan. 7, affirming judgments on second rehearing 136 P. 246, 90 Kan. 774, and 139 P. 1030, 92 Kan. 254. Where a referee's report recommended that defendant be given a lien on the land in controversy for the amount due from plaintiff, the court, after confirming the report, could order the land sold to satisfy such lien, though the report was that defendant was not entitled to a foreclosure. Holmes v. Holt, 93 Kan. 7, 142 P. 369. The court may, without formally setting aside the report, adopt the findings of fact and determine the law for itself. Osage City Cemetery Ass'n v. Hanslip, 82 Kan. 20, 107 P. 785. 68 Burchett v. Hamil, 5 Okl. 300, 47 P. 1053. 69 Brown v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co., 112 P. 147, 83 Kan. 574. 70 James v. Coleman, 64 Okl. 99, 166 P. 210. 71 State Bank of Stockton v. Showers, 70 P. 332, 65 Kan. 431. 72 Burchett v. Hamil, 5 Okl. 300, 47 P. 1053. 73 Northrup Nat. Bank v. Webster Refining Co., 138 P. 587, 91 Kan. 434, affirming judgment on rehearing 132 P. 832, 89 Kan. 738. Evidence reported by a referee becomes a part of the record, and Evidence before a referee cannot be reviewed by a trial court un- Though a referee has no power to grant a new trial, the court The court should set aside the judgment of a referee and grant a Where the referee's report is entirely set aside, the effect is to The doctrine of lis pendens under the common law was based on 74 James v. Coleman, 64 Okl. 99, 166 P. 210. 75 Geary Milling & Elevator Co. v. Lane, 45 Okl. 21, 144 P. 1029. 76 Iralson v. Stang, 90 P. 446, 18 Okl. 423. 77 Humble v. German Alliance Ins. Co., 116 P. 472, 85 Kan. 140, Ann. Cas. 78 Kingfisher Imp. Co. v. Board of Com'rs of Jefferson County (Okl.) 168 P. 79 McWhorter v. Brady, 140 P. 782, 41 Okl. 383. HON.PL.& PRAC.-113 (1793) 80 The theory is, to keep the subject-matter of the controversy within the power of the court until the final judgment is rendered, so that the judgment, when rendered, may be effective. It cannot be based upon a proceeding instituted after the conveyance in controversy was taken.81 § 1917. Notice of action "When the petition has been filed, the action is pending, so as to charge third persons with notice of its pendency, and while pending no interest can be acquired by third persons in the subjectmatter thereof as against the plaintiff's title; but such notice shall be of no avail, unless the summons be served or the first publication made within sixty days after the filing of the petition." 11 82 Where a plaintiff in a suit to cancel a deed dismissed his action without prejudice and shortly thereafter commenced a new suit on the same cause of action, the plaintiff did not lose the benefit of notice of action as to one who had purchased during the pendency of the suit and prior to dismissal. 83 80 Guaranty State Bank of Okmulgee v. Pratt (Okl.) 180 P. 376. 81 McIntosh v. Reason (Okl.) 172 P. 446. 82 Rev. Laws 1910, § 4732. Lis pendens established by filing petition is rendered of no avail, where first publication of nonresident notice is made more than 60 days thereafter. Core v. Smith, 102 P. 114, 23 Okl. 909. Where an action to cancel a deed was instituted in March, 1910, but no summons was issued until July 19, 1910, and a purchaser had acquired title from the defendant on July 26, 1910, such purchaser was a purchaser pendente lite, and the action was notice to him. Shufeldt v. Jefcoat, 50 Okl. 790, 151 P. 595. The filing of a petition and the issuance of a summons against a stockholder, to recover on his statutory liability, is not of itself sufficient to bind the stockholder, so that he is protected in subsequent payments to a creditor of the corporation before the service of the summons and without actual notice of the suit. Campbell v. Reese, 56 P. 543, 8 Kan. App. 518. Where a petition for divorce, praying that specified property of the husband may be assigned to plaintiff as alimony, is indorsed as filed, by the clerk, but is immediately taken from the office, and no summons is issued thereon, there is no such filing as is contemplated by the statute, providing that, "when the petition has been filed, the action is pending, and, while pending, no interest can be acquired by third persons, in the subject-matter thereof, as against the plaintiff's title." Wilkinson v. Elliott, 23 P. 614, 43 Kan. 590, 19 Am. St. Rep. 158. 88 Shufeldt v. Jefcoat, 50 Okl. 790, 151 P. 595. § 1918. Jurisdiction It is essential to the existence of a valid lis pendens that the property be of a character subject to the rule and that the court have jurisdiction.84 It is essential to the existence of a valid lis pendens that the property be sufficiently described in the pleadings.85 Where a wife, in her petition for divorce, describes certain property of her husband, and prays that it may be set apart to her as permanent alimony, the doctrine of lis pendens applies, and any one purchasing the property, pending the suit, will be bound by the judgment subsequently rendered therein.8 86 A description of certain land in a pleading, where an order relative to the land is not sought, does not constitute a lis pendens as to the land.87 § 1919. Pendency of action Where the plaintiff dismissed his action without prejudice, and shortly thereafter commenced a new suit on the same cause of action, he did not lose the benefit of notice of the action as to one who had purchased during the pendency of the suit and prior to dismissal.88 The rule that when a petition has been filed third persons are charged with notice of the pendency of the action applies to cases pending on appeal, though a supersedeas bond has not been given.s 84 McWhorter v. Brady, 140 P. 782, 41 Okl. 383. 85 McWhorter v. Brady, 140 P. 782, 41 Okl. 383. 89 A vague description of land in a petition for divorce and possession of the homestead is sufficient, to meet the requirements of a valid lis pendens, where it apprised the purchaser of the status of the land and enabled him to identify same and ascertain the object of the suit. Id. 86 Wilkinson v. Elliott, 23 P. 614, 43 Kan. 590, 19 Am. St. Rep. 158. Where the wife, in an action for divorce, files an answer and cross-petition setting up grounds for a divorce in her favor; that she was the owner of certain lands, describing them; that her husband was the owner of certain other real estate and personal property, describing it; and praying that a divorce be granted her; that the real estate in her name be decreed to her; that alimony be granted, and all the property, personal and real, be appropriated to satisfy said decree-held, that said answer and cross petition brought the property described within the jurisdiction of the court, and a person subsequently taking a mortgage thereon from the husband alone is bound by the decree thereinafter rendered. Garver v. Graham, 51 P. 812, 6 Kan. App. 344. 87 Harrison v. Shaffer, 55 P. 881. 60 Kan. 176, 88 Shufeldt v. Jefcoat, 50 Okl. 790, 151 P. 595. 89 Where pending appeal by wife in divorce from a judgment giving certain § 1920. Amendment The lis pendens as to a purchaser of property is not affected by the filing of an amended petition which does not change the cause of action.90 Lis pendens does not apply to new matters introduced by amended or supplemental pleadings, until such pleadings have been filed.o1 § 1921. Transfers pending suit A party to litigation cannot transfer the property in issue so as to prejudice the rights of the plaintiff therein.o2 land to the husband the husband leased the land, though no supersedeas bond was given, the tenant was bound by the result of the appeal. Kremer v. Schutz, 107 P. 780, 82 Kan. 175, 27 L. R. A. (N. S.) 735. It is not requisite that a supersedeas bond be given by the plaintiff in the case in order to give force to the provisions of said section. McClung v. Hohl, 61 P. 507, 10 Kan. App. 93. 90 Bell v. Diesem, 121 P. 335, 86 Kan. 364. Land was sold at execution sale, subject to a mortgage and the purchaser was made party defendant to a suit to foreclose the mortgage. Pending such suit he conveyed the land to K., but the deed was not recorded. The petition was afterwards amended, but no new cause of action set up. Held, that the amendment acted retroactively, and K. was a purchaser pendente lite. Myers v. Jones, 61 Kan. 191, 59 P. 275. 91 After a judgment, though lis pendens applies to enable the court to enforce the judgment or other appropriate proceedings based upon the issues on which the judgment was rendered, yet it does not apply to new matters introduced by amended or supplemental pleadings until such pleadings have been filed; and mere motion for leave to file such pleadings imparts no notice of the new issue to which they relate. Cornell University v. Parkinson, 53 P. 138, 59 Kan. 365. 92 Guaranty State Bank of Okmulgee v. Pratt (Okl.) 180 P. 376; Jones v. Standiferd, 77 P. 271, 69 Kan. 513. A sheriff's deed issued on a sale on August 31st was superior to a deed executed on June 23d while suit was pending against the land in question and after an order of sale under execution had already issued. Coblentz v. Cochran, 44 Okl. 158, 143 P. 658. In a wife's action for divorce, an injunction issued restraining the husband from disposing of his property during the suit. The husband gave a chattel mortgage to his attorney to secure notes for his fees at a time when the injunction and proof of service on defendant were missing from the court files. Held, that the attorney acquired no title as against the wife, to whom the property was awarded by the decree, since he took the mortgage with actual notice of the injunction. Uhl v. Irwin, 41 P. 376, 3 Okl, 388. A purchaser of land at an execution sale who buys pending a suit to determine whether another judgment is not a prior lien to that under which the sale is made, and who before buying examines the record in such suit, is chargeable with notice that plaintiff therein claims his judgment to be the |