Linscott v. Conner
Supreme Court of Kansas
Appeal from Jackson district court.
1Per curiam
The court properly charged the jury to take into consideration all the facts and circumstances proven and it was not necessary to direct their attention particularly to the circumstances surrounding one transaction. Besides, the jury were only called in an advisory capacity to answer certain questions of fact and the court approved and adopted their findings, so that the question of erroneous instructions becomes of no importance unless it appear that the court proceeded upon an erroneous theory of the law; and this is not claimed.
Agency may be shown by circumstantial evidence, and there was…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Thurman v. CundiffCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1978
- Wilson v. HaunSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916
- King v. H. J. McNeel, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1971
- Walker v. EckhardtSupreme Court of Kansas · 1927
- Fairbank v. FairbankSupreme Court of Kansas · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.