Daub v. McCoy

Supreme Court of Kansas

Daub v. McCoy

91 P. 91, 76 Kan. 360, 1907 Kan. LEXIS 266

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedJuly 5, 1907

DocketNo. 15,171

StatusPublished

This text of 91 P. 91 (Daub v. McCoy) 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

Daub v. McCoy, 91 P. 91, 76 Kan. 360, 1907 Kan. LEXIS 266 (kan 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Graves, J.:

This was an action to recover damages for breach of contract, commenced in the district court of Shawnee county.

On the trial the defendant recovered a verdict. On motion of the plaintiff the verdict was set aside and a new trial granted. The defendant brings the. case here and asks this court to reverse the order of the court granting a new trial, and, in addition thereto, to direct a judgment in his favor. The new trial was granted on account of misconduct of the jury during their deliberations. The defendant insists that the verdict [361]*361was right regardless of the methods by which it was reached. In fact he claims that under the law the plaintiff has no right to recover against the defendant in any view of the case.

But the question for the consideration of this court is, Did the district court err in granting a new trial on the ground of misconduct of the jury? We think not. This is as far as we need to inquire. A new trial has been granted, and this court cannot assume that the trial court will not administer the law correctly upon the new trial. Until the case is finally disposed of by the trial court, this court cannot review the case on its merits.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Graves, J.:

This was an action to recover damages for breach of contract, commenced in the district court of Shawnee county.

On the trial the defendant recovered a verdict. On motion of the plaintiff the verdict was set aside and a new trial granted. The defendant brings the. case here and asks this court to reverse the order of the court granting a new trial, and, in addition thereto, to direct a judgment in his favor. The new trial was granted on account of misconduct of the jury during their deliberations. The defendant insists that the verdict [361]*361was right regardless of the methods by which it was reached. In fact he claims that under the law the plaintiff has no right to recover against the defendant in any view of the case.

But the question for the consideration of this court is, Did the district court err in granting a new trial on the ground of misconduct of the jury? We think not. This is as far as we need to inquire. A new trial has been granted, and this court cannot assume that the trial court will not administer the law correctly upon the new trial. Until the case is finally disposed of by the trial court, this court cannot review the case on its merits.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 P. 91, 76 Kan. 360, 1907 Kan. LEXIS 266, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daub-v-mccoy-kan-1907.