Martin v. State ex rel. Hall

39 Kan. 576
Supreme Court of Kansas·Decided January 15, 1888·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The county attorney of Stevens county had no right to institute this proceeding, in the name of the state, in the district court of Shawnee county, without the consent and against the objection of the attorney general. (Comp. Laws of 1885, ch. 25, art. 10, § 136; id., ch. 102, art. 7; Comm’rs of Leavenworth Co. v. Brewer, 9 Kas. 307.)

The order and judgment of the district court will be reversed, and the cause remanded, with direction to that court to vacate and set aside the injunction heretofore granted.

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

Martin v. State ex rel. Hall, 39 Kan. 576 (kan 1888).

39 Kan. 576 (Martin v. State ex rel. Hall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rural Water District 2 v. City of Louisburg
207 P.3d 1055 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 2009)
State ex rel. MacDonald v. Peterson
78 P.2d 60 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1938)
State v. Finch
280 P. 910 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1929)
State ex rel. Ratner v. Jones
220 P. 275 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1923)