Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Guild
Court of Appeals of Kansas
Error from Washington district court; F. W. Sturges, judge.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mahan, P. J.:
Defendant in error presents a question of jurisdiction. He contends that there is no case-made presented to this court to authorize it to review the judgment of the court below. This contention is based on the construction of sections 547, 548 and 549 of the code (Gen. Stat. 1897, ch. '95, §§ 588, 589, 690). At the time the judgment was entered, June 24, 1897, the court, at the request of the plaintiff in error, granted it sixty days from that date in which to make and serve a case. There were several extensions of time allowed for making…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. HunterSupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
- Denny v. FaulknerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1879
- Ætna Life Insurance v. KoonsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
- M. K. & T. Railway Co. v. City of Fort ScottSupreme Court of Kansas · 1875
- Weeks v. MedlerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. GuildSupreme Court of Kansas · 1899