Griffin v. O'Neil
Supreme Court of Kansas
Motion for Rehearing. The facts sufficiently appear in Griffin v. O’Neil, 47 Kas. 116, etseq,, and in the opinion herein, filed on March 5,1892.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Horton, C. J.:
This case comes to us at this time upon a motion for a rehearing. In the former opinion handed down, *118it was said “that the defendant below claims that he purchased the 19 head of cattle for the aggregate sum of $448, and that he paid the full consideration.” “We think, however,” it is said, “ that the evidence of the plaintiff made a prima facie case in favor of his allegation — that he sold the 19 head of ■cattle for $595; therefore, that the trial court committed no error in overruling the demurrer to plaintiff’s evidence.” It was…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Squires v. WoodburyCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1980
- Star-Chronicle Pub. Co. v. New York Evening Post, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919
- Cargill Commission Co. v. MowerySupreme Court of Kansas · 1916
- Triple a Contractors, Inc. v. Rural Water District No. 4Supreme Court of Kansas · 1979
- Seigle v. Hamilton-Carhartt Cotton MillsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.