Holmquist v. Anderson

74 P. 227, 67 Kan. 861, 1903 Kan. LEXIS 386
Supreme Court of Kansas·Decided November 7, 1903·No. No. 13,261·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

A. J. Holmquist sought to enjoin the officials of the city of Salina from making certain improvements and imposing the cost upon the property affected. A demurrer to his original petition was properly sustained because the action was brought before th§ cost was apportioned or any amount was laid against the plaintiff’s property. (Mason v. Independence, 61 Kan. 188, 59 Pac. 272; Kansas City v. Smiley, 62 id. 718, 64 Pac. 613.) Afterward, during the pendency of the action, the amount due against his property was ascertained, and more than thirty days later plaintiff filed a supplemental petition setting out this fact. The commencement of tbe cause of action stated in the supplemental petition dates from the filing of that pleading and not from the filing of the original petition (A. T. c& S. F. Rld. Co. v. Schroeder, 56 Kan. 731, 44 Pac. 1093), and this action was therefore brought too late. (Glen. Stat. 1901, §1016; Wahlgren v. Kansas City, 42 Kan. 243, 21 Pac. 1068.)

The judgment, is affirmed.

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

Holmquist v. Anderson, 74 P. 227, 67 Kan. 861, 1903 Kan. LEXIS 386 (kan 1903).

74 P. 227 (Holmquist v. Anderson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wheeler v. City of Muskogee
1915 OK 36 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1915)
Hildreth v. City of Longmont
47 Colo. 79 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1909)