Board of County Commissioners v. Smith

Supreme Court of Kansas

Board of County Commissioners v. Smith

107 P. 1119, 82 Kan. 857, 1910 Kan. LEXIS 357

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedApril 9, 1910

DocketNo. 16,486

StatusPublished

This text of 107 P. 1119 (Board of County Commissioners v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Board of County Commissioners v. Smith, 107 P. 1119, 82 Kan. 857, 1910 Kan. LEXIS 357 (kan 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The journal entry of the judgment sought to be opened shows the applicants were parties to the suit, were served by publication, and that property claimed by them was affected. The evidence in opposition to the application shows [858]*858the case was dismissed as to other lots, and shows conveyance of other lots, but does not contradict the journal entry. Therefore the action of the district court was against the evidence. Besides this, the applicants should have been allowed to introduce their additional evidence. The cause had not been so irrevocably sealed that the immediate offer of more proof, and quite conclusive proof, of just what the court desired to know, was bad.

The judgment is reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

The journal entry of the judgment sought to be opened shows the applicants were parties to the suit, were served by publication, and that property claimed by them was affected. The evidence in opposition to the application shows [858]*858the case was dismissed as to other lots, and shows conveyance of other lots, but does not contradict the journal entry. Therefore the action of the district court was against the evidence. Besides this, the applicants should have been allowed to introduce their additional evidence. The cause had not been so irrevocably sealed that the immediate offer of more proof, and quite conclusive proof, of just what the court desired to know, was bad.

The judgment is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 P. 1119, 82 Kan. 857, 1910 Kan. LEXIS 357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-county-commissioners-v-smith-kan-1910.