Legal Opinion

Tays v. Carr

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided July 15, 1887PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error from Marshall District Court. Action by Carr against Tays and two others, to recover upon a promissory note. Trial at the August Term, 1885, and verdict for plaintiff. New trial denied, and judgment rendered for plaintiff for $425 aud costs. To. reverse this judgment, defendant brings the case here. The facts appear in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Holt, C.:

This action was tried by a jury, at the August term, 1885, of the district court. Plaintiff in error was defendant below, and defendant in error was plaintiff below. The action was brought upon a note signed by defendant and two others, for $300, given in Missouri in 1881, and due in one year after date. There is a conflict of testimony as to whether Tays, the defendant, was one of the principals, or surety on the note. The defendant, before the cause was called for trial, made a motion in writing to strike out certain parts of the depositions of sundry witnesses, because…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. BuffingtonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1878
  2. State v. WhiteSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
  3. Johnson v. MathewsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1869

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hertzel v. WeberSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
  2. State v. GraySupreme Court of Kansas · 1895
  3. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. WimmerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1906
  4. Carter v. Bond & BondSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  5. Westerman v. LampeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1949

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