Odell v. Sargent
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from, Leavenworth County. The facts of the case sufficient to present the points decided, appear in the opinion of the court. 1. After a term of court has expired during which a judgment was rendered, the court has no discretion or authority at a subsequent term to set aside said judgment.
Read the full summary
Error from, Leavenworth County. The facts of the case sufficient to present the points decided, appear in the opinion of the court. 1. After a term of court has expired during which a judgment was rendered, the court has no discretion or authority at a subsequent term to set aside said judgment. Cook v. Wood, et dl., 24 Ills., 295 ; Cameron v. McRoberts, 3 Wheat., 593; JacJcson v. Ashton, 10 Peters, 480; Washington Bridge Co. v. Stewart, 3 How., 413; Suydam v. Pitcher, 4 Cal., 280 ; Robb v. Robb, 6 Id. 21; Brewer v. Dinwiddie, 25 Mo., 352; Hill v. City of St. Louis, 20 Id. 584; Blackstone’s…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Kingman, J.
This cause is brought to this court under paragraph 2 of section 4 of the -act amendatory of the Code passed Feb. 25th, 1860.
The plaintiff in error who was plaintiff below, obtained a judgment against the defendants and others on the 12th day of March 1864. On the 25th day of March thereafter, the following journal entry is made :
“ Now comes William Sargent, one of the defendants herein, and moves the court for leave to file a motion to reverse so much of the decree herein rendered at the present term as relates to him the said William Sargent, which said motion is by…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Mitchell v. MilhoanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1873
- Nesbit v. HinesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876
- United States, Ex Rel. v. C., O. G. R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1895
- In Re PerryIndiana Court of Appeals · 1925
- McKinney v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1892
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.