Backus v. Clark
Supreme Court of Kansas
The opinion contains a full statement of the facts. When the evidence is contradictory, and the jury might find either way, the court will not set aside the finding.
Read the full summary
The opinion contains a full statement of the facts. When the evidence is contradictory, and the jury might find either way, the court will not set aside the finding. (Douglass vs. Tausey, 2 Wend., 352; Lewis vs. Bayn, 4 Wend., 423; Tiffin vs. Borrcster, 8 Mo., 643; 2 Cow., 483; Dauson vs. Robbins, 5 Oilman, 72 ; Evans vs. Eisher et al., ibid., 569 ; Johnson vs. Maulton, 1 Scam., 533.) The evidence as to whether Backus authorized the work, &c., to he done, or ratified the doing of it for him after it was. done, is conflicting. Backus, by referring Clark to Auton, is hound by Auton’s acts. An…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Cobb, C. J.
Clark brought his action in the-district court against Backus, for work done by Mm in plas*306tering and ornamenting a certain brick church for said Backus, alleging in his petition the facts constituting his cause of action, but not showing the time when such cause of action accrued, otherwise than by annexing thereto a copy of his account for work done, stating the time the work was completed, and stating in the petition that áaid copy of account is made a part thereof.
The defendant, by answer, denied the “matters and things set out in the petición,” and upon the issue…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Barada v. Inhabitants of CarondeletSupreme Court of Missouri · 1844
3Cited by25 opinions
- United States, Ex Rel. v. C., O. G. R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1895
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. MillikenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- Zane v. ZaneSupreme Court of Kansas · 1869
- Gray v. UlrichSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- Knebel v. RennieSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.