Legal Opinion

Estes v. Edgar Zinc Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided April 8, 1916No. 20,109PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from Montgomery district court; Thomas J. Flan-NELLY, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Burch, J.:

The action was one by an employee for damages resulting from personal injuries occasioned by the negligence of his employer. The plaintiff recovered. On appeal to this court the judgment was reversed because of a special finding that there was no evidence relating to a material fact, and a new trial was ordered. (Estes v. Zinc Co., 91 Kan. 138, 136 Pac. 910.) Before the second trial the plaintiff died. The action was revived in the name of the plaintiff’s administratrix, who prosecuted it to judgment. The defendant was again defeated and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. City of Atchison v. TwineSupreme Court of Kansas · 1872
  2. Headley v. ChallissSupreme Court of Kansas · 1875
  3. Central Branch Union Pacific Railroad v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1886
  4. Lorimer v. FairchildSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
  5. Estes v. Edgar Zinc Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1913

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Doty v. Crystal Ice & Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1927
  2. Kansas Baptist Convention v. Mesa Operating Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of Kansas · 1995
  3. Lechleitner v. CummingsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1945
  4. Schaffner v. Estate of SchaffnerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916
  5. State ex rel. Beals v. City of StaffordSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API