Legal Opinion

Hill v. Maxwell

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided March 11, 1905No. 13,977PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error from Sedgwick district court; David M. Dale, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Burch, J.:

This action was brought to recover a

balance claimed to be due for the sale of a tract of land. After the evidence was all in the court declined to submit the case to the jury called to try it, and directed a verdict for the plaintiff. The evidence favorable to the defendant tended to show the following state of facts: The defendant agreed to purchase of the plaintiff a tract of land represented to contain 320 acres, at the price of fifteen dollars per acre. He made a small partial payment, and went into possession. -Before the day appointed…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Neely v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
  2. Butler v. ScottSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
  3. Todd v. AllenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Coonrod & Walz Construction Co. v. Motel Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1975
  2. Bailey v. NortonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1955
  3. Gibbs v. ErbertSupreme Court of Kansas · 1967
  4. Haas v. NemethSupreme Court of Kansas · 1934
  5. Saddlewood Downs, L.L.C. v. Holland Corp.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 2004

2 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