Warner v. Overton
This text of 75 P. 1134 (Warner v. Overton) 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.
Opinion
No error was committed in refusing the c'hange of venue. There was little in the testimony tending to prove local prejudice or that a fair and impartial trial could not be had in Hamilton county. At least, it cannot be said that the court abused its discretion in denying the application.
There is sufficient proof of the ownership of the cattle by Earlie Overton to sustain the findings and judgment.
There was no such confusion of theories in the case as to give any good reason for complaint, nor do we find anything, material in the objections to rulings on testimony. The case was fairly submitted on the instructions, and the judgment will be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
75 P. 1134, 68 Kan. 819, 1904 Kan. LEXIS 189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/warner-v-overton-kan-1904.