Courtney v. Harkins

Supreme Court of Kansas

Courtney v. Harkins

93 P. 1132, 77 Kan. 834, 1907 Kan. LEXIS 189

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedDecember 7, 1907

DocketNo. 15,242

StatusPublished

This text of 93 P. 1132 (Courtney v. Harkins) 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

Courtney v. Harkins, 93 P. 1132, 77 Kan. 834, 1907 Kan. LEXIS 189 (kan 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

W. H. Courtney sued L. J. Harkins to recover the balance of rent due for a farm. The bill of particulars claimed that the rent amounted to $800 and gave defendant credit for payments amounting to $652.19, and asked'for judgment for the balance. Defendant answered and claimed cash payments amounting to $770, and set up a counter-claim of $57.19 for repairs and labor. He asked judgment on his counterclaim for $27.19. The jury returned a verdict for defendant. Plaintiff then moved for judgment notwithstanding- the verdict. This, as well as a motion for a* new trial, being denied, judgment was rendered in accordance with the verdict, and plaintiff brings error.

The contention is that because the jury refused to find any balance due the defendant they discredited the entire counter-claim, and plaintiff insists that this entitled him to judgment in full for his claim. The only authorities cited are cases where there were separate findings. In this case there were no findings and there was evidence to support the verdict, and, as the judgment has been approved by the trial court, it must be affirmed.

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

Per Curiam:

W. H. Courtney sued L. J. Harkins to recover the balance of rent due for a farm. The bill of particulars claimed that the rent amounted to $800 and gave defendant credit for payments amounting to $652.19, and asked'for judgment for the balance. Defendant answered and claimed cash payments amounting to $770, and set up a counter-claim of $57.19 for repairs and labor. He asked judgment on his counterclaim for $27.19. The jury returned a verdict for defendant. Plaintiff then moved for judgment notwithstanding- the verdict. This, as well as a motion for a* new trial, being denied, judgment was rendered in accordance with the verdict, and plaintiff brings error.

The contention is that because the jury refused to find any balance due the defendant they discredited the entire counter-claim, and plaintiff insists that this entitled him to judgment in full for his claim. The only authorities cited are cases where there were separate findings. In this case there were no findings and there was evidence to support the verdict, and, as the judgment has been approved by the trial court, it must be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 P. 1132, 77 Kan. 834, 1907 Kan. LEXIS 189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/courtney-v-harkins-kan-1907.