Hoyne v. Schneider

Supreme Court of Kansas

Hoyne v. Schneider

33 P.2d 715, 139 Kan. 676, 1934 Kan. LEXIS 123

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedJune 9, 1934

DocketNo. 31,301

StatusPublished

This text of 33 P.2d 715 (Hoyne v. Schneider) 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

Hoyne v. Schneider, 33 P.2d 715, 139 Kan. 676, 1934 Kan. LEXIS 123 (kan 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Thiele, J.:

At the first submission of this cause the judgment of the trial court was reversed. (See 138 Kan. 545, 27 P. 2d 558.)

A petition for a rehearing was allowed, and additional briefs have been filed and the matter reargued. Upon reconsideration of the record and the original opinion, it appears that an omission of words has occurred in the third paragraph on page 548. The words “and plat’’ should follow the word "notes” in all four instances where the latter word appears, and the original opinion is amended to that extent. As so amended we are of the opinion the original judgment reversing the judgment of the trial court should be adhered to, and it is so ordered.

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Thiele, J.:

At the first submission of this cause the judgment of the trial court was reversed. (See 138 Kan. 545, 27 P. 2d 558.)

A petition for a rehearing was allowed, and additional briefs have been filed and the matter reargued. Upon reconsideration of the record and the original opinion, it appears that an omission of words has occurred in the third paragraph on page 548. The words “and plat’’ should follow the word "notes” in all four instances where the latter word appears, and the original opinion is amended to that extent. As so amended we are of the opinion the original judgment reversing the judgment of the trial court should be adhered to, and it is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 P.2d 715, 139 Kan. 676, 1934 Kan. LEXIS 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoyne-v-schneider-kan-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack