Davis v. City of Holton

Supreme Court of Kansas

Davis v. City of Holton

72 P. 1099, 66 Kan. 791, 1903 Kan. LEXIS 173

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedApril 11, 1903

DocketNo. 12,018

StatusPublished

This text of 72 P. 1099 (Davis v. City of Holton) 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

Davis v. City of Holton, 72 P. 1099, 66 Kan. 791, 1903 Kan. LEXIS 173 (kan 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

We find nothing substantial in the argument of counsel for plaintiff in error in support of the assignments of error. The testimony of the absent witness was largely cumulative. The admission of testimony [792]*792claimed by plaintiff in error to be incompetent we regard as harmless. While the court by reiteration gave much emphasis to the law governing contributory negligence, we cannot say that the jury were prejudiced thereby against the plaintiff in error.

The judgment of the trial court will be affirmed.

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

Per Curiam:

We find nothing substantial in the argument of counsel for plaintiff in error in support of the assignments of error. The testimony of the absent witness was largely cumulative. The admission of testimony [792]*792claimed by plaintiff in error to be incompetent we regard as harmless. While the court by reiteration gave much emphasis to the law governing contributory negligence, we cannot say that the jury were prejudiced thereby against the plaintiff in error.

The judgment of the trial court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 P. 1099, 66 Kan. 791, 1903 Kan. LEXIS 173, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-city-of-holton-kan-1903.