Legal Opinion

Rumor v. Rumor

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided May 9, 1903No. 13,112PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error from Sumner district court; W. T. McBride, judge.

1Per curiam

The principal claim of error in this case is that there is no sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict. It was an action by the wife against her husband’s father to recover of him’her damages occasioned by the alienation of her husband’s affections, by reason of the malicious acts and words of the father. Necessarily in such a case very little of direct evidence can be adduced. Much must be left to deduction. We find in the evidence sufficient to sustain the conclusions arrived at by the jury.

It is further claimed that the court erred in the admission and rejection of evidence. All of these…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Davidson v. DouglassSupreme Court of Kansas · 1930
  2. Burch v. GoodsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911
  3. Roberts v. DockstaderSupreme Court of Kansas · 1936

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API