Legal Opinion

Grannell v. Wakefield

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided April 12, 1952No. 38,565PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Wedell, J.:

Plaintiff instituted suit for an accounting involving an alleged partnership or joint adventure in oil and gas drilling operations and for judgment on the amount found to be owing. The judgment decreed plaintiff, Tom Grannell, was entitled to an accounting. From that judgment the defendant, Earl F. Wakefield, has appealed.

The amount found due to appellee, if any, has not been determined. The trial court retained jurisdiction for that purpose.

Although appellant assigns various errors his fundamental complaints are (1) appellee’s evidence…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Shoemake v. DavisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1937
  2. Shepard v. PrattSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876
  3. Yeager v. GrahamSupreme Court of Kansas · 1939
  4. Livingston v. LewisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1921
  5. ætna Ins. Co. v. MurrayCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1933

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Wolf v. BrungardtSupreme Court of Kansas · 1974
  2. Weiner v. FleischmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Lostutter v. Estate of LarkinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1984
  4. St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity Company v. United States of America for the Use of H. C. Jones, Doing Business as H. C. Jones Construction Company, Burden Ivy Barfield, Bourdon Ray Barfield, and Oliver Eakle Barfield, as Co-Partners Doing Business as Barfield Construction Company v. United States of America for the Use of H. C. Jones, Doing Business as H. C. Jones Construction CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1957
  5. Britton v. GreenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1963

16 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