Dickinson v. Beal
Court of Appeals of Kansas
Error from Shawnee district court; Z. T. Hazen, judge. STATEMENT. Plaintiff in error sued defendant in error to recover $210 for pasturing seventy head of steers.
Read the full summary
Error from Shawnee district court; Z. T. Hazen, judge. STATEMENT. Plaintiff in error sued defendant in error to recover $210 for pasturing seventy head of steers. The defendant answered denying any liability on account thereof, and alleging by way of counter-claim that the defendant, in the spring of 1898, sold the steers to plaintiff at $4.25 per hundred pounds, amounting to $2840.60 ; that on the 16th of August, 1898, the plaintiff had paid $2445.89, leaving a balance of $477.55, with interest from August 16, 1898, for which ho asked judgment against the plaintiff. The plaintiff replied to…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mahan, P. J.:
It is first contended that the court erred in refusing to permit the plaintiff to propound to a witness for the defendant and require the witness to answer the question whether he, the witness, believed in the existence of a God. It is said in the argument that the object of this question was to determine the competency of the witness and the weight to be given to his testimony, by showing that *235he did not believe in the existence of a God. At common law a person who did not believe in the existence of a God was incompetent to testify.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad v. Consolidated Cattle Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1898
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. . BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- State v. BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- McClellan v. OwensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1934
- Meyer v. MeyerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1972
- Richa v. Wichita Precision Tool Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1962
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.